‘Best Zombie Sites’ Poll Apparently Lacks a Single Zombie Rights Organization
Now, we’re not in this business for the fame or adulation, but I’d like to think that The Zombie Rights Campaign has, by now, earned a little bit of recognition as a leader in the burgeoning Zombie Rights Movement, at least here in America.
Yet this poll to determine the ‘Best Zombie Site’ not only lacks us as a voting option – it seems to lack a single Zombie Rights organization, or even a strongly Zombie Friendly social group!
Outrageous, isn’t it?
Look at the kinds of sites they *do* list though. Currently in the running at #1 is ‘Zombies Eat People’, a fearmongering site promoting ugly stereotypes about the peaceful Zombie population. #2 is ‘The Australian Zombie Awareness Association‘, a compendium of post-apocalyptic ‘survival’ plans and guides, once again spreading the erroneous notion that Zombies automatically equal some sort of End of the World scenario.
Riiiiiight.
There are 48 more sites, mostly like those, although our trusted source BuyZombie.com is also in the running. Mostly, however, it’s one page after another pandering to the worst and ugliest prejudices about the Undead, with nary a Zombie Friendly website to be found.
Why would this be? I can only assume… Anti-Zombie sentiment.
For shame. Simply: for shame.
About The Author
To be fair, we do not encourage the outright attack and kill method of survival. In fact, we recommend against combat with the undead in favour of hiding and distraction methods.
Most our admins (and fans) are quite happy to let the zombies run the course of their lives, and the only violence should occur in self-defence.
<3 The Australian Zombie Awareness Association :P
It’s a pretty low bar you set for yourself, not encouraging murder. Still, hiding from and distracting your fellow citizens does not sound like an immensely productive method of interaction! How can we build a mutually respectful and productive society if one segment of the population is always being encouraged to avoid the other?
Well, you can consider it for a zombie’s own protection when you consider the majority of the living population have the instinct, “zombie! kill it!”. Through avoidance, both alive and undead can co-exist without risk of conflict.
In a measure of good faith, we invite you to produce an article for zombie tolerance that we will display on our website.
Avoidance can’t be an acceptable option, it’s tantamount to apartheid! The ZRC wants to see full integration and peaceful co-existence, mutual cooperation and productive dialogue.
Avoiding conflict with distance has never worked historically, and we firmly believe it’s wrong morally as well.
The ZRC would be happy to consider writing an article to help promote tolerance, although I have my doubts that your readership would be hugely receptive to the message; we’ve taken it directly to Anti-Zombie actors and directors, we’re willing to take it to your readers as well.
So we should let hungry foxes in with the chickens for the sake of a chance at peace?
Articles can be sent to tazaa@live.com.au if you choose to send us one :) We originally had a zombie sympathiser planned, but she currently has over comittments,
We object to the characterization of Zombies as ‘hungry foxes’. Not all Zombies require human flesh, and even if they did, that is a medical condition not a choice or uncontrollable impulse.
Many organs and forms of donated tissue are obtained from the Living, but you don’t see organ recipients being characterized as ravenous cannibals. It’s a double standard!
The anology can be reversed. The humans could just as likely be the “hungry foxes”, all wanting “zombie kill of the week”.
I think the key word in your point is “donation”. If people want to give their flesh and brains to zombies, I will not stop them. But I am not a confirmed organ donor, and do not wish to surrender my organs anytime soon.
If a zombie tries to forcibly take a living human’s flesh, they must expect a level of self-defence.