Have you seen all their ads? They don't all suck.

Not that I am a fan of PETA. As a vegan and a feminist, I have butted heads with many other animal rights activists over the content of their ads. Most of their ads go for shock and hotties wearing bikinis over information.

When I am a budding vegetarian, I used to have a picture of a pig that said something similar to friends not food. PETA does release ads that are cute and aimed for children. The "I am NOT a nugget" ad comes to mind.

It saddens me to see the organization take such a bizarre turn. I think the nudie ladies have grabbed them a lot of attention. They continue to focus on that one issue, seeing it as a singular cause instead of interconnected with women's rights.

I don't think you should try to call out the whole organization. They do decent work.

I would just like to emphasis the part of Wesley's comment that I agree with.

PETA has the goal of advancing the ethical treatment of animals. And I must say, I think the extent to which that goal is "interconnected with women's rights" is tenuous at best. Both groups are attempting to improve society and its treatment of certain issues, but the goals are quite distinct.

It makes sense for PETA to use techniques that they know will be the most successful to promote their goals. Turns out, sex still sells.

Where are you getting the idea that PETA has an 85% shelter euthanasia rate? I know there was an anti-PETA ad/spam (debunked) put out by a fur industry front that claimed that, but PETA doesn't run shelters. They liaise and work with shelters, often very extensively, but PETA is an advocacy group, not a shelter network. They would, however, likely prove an excellent resource for a local organization, government office, or pro bono attorney to intervene in the situation.

As for whether their ads are sexist: there have been a few bad ones, but for the most part feminists who aren't willing to criticize the for-profit sex industry don't have much ground to argue with people (not only women) volunteering for the PETA ads as part of their activism, or for the fact that the ads are deliberately shocking. (If you are willing to criticize the sex industry, it's perhaps a different story.) Fundamentally, though, the issue is that animals - sentient beings that experience pain and fear - are suffering terribly. Doing something to end that may force you to contact an organization whose ads you don't always like. For the sake of animals that have less agency than the most exploited and marginalized women in the world, bite the bullet and do it.

(For the sake of intellectual honesty, let me note I don't think the oppression of animals by humans is closely linked to the oppression of women by men most of the times. I just don't think causing/ignoring avoidable suffering is okay under any circumstances.)

from a very young age i've hated the logical fallacy of "two wrongs don't make a right", as i've always believed that there are enough exceptions to make that statement ridiculous. this is NOT one of those exceptions.
when i first stopped eating meat at 15, and began reading books about animal rights way back in the 80's, peta was one of the first organizations i turned to for information. but, as they began to use these sexist tactics, i grew increasingly leery of any group that insisted on rights for one set of living creatures on this earth, yet could so buy into(and so easily use) how another group has been treated and mistreated since...well, pretty much since forever...to sell their message.
sex sells? yeah, it does. but, sex selling solely at the expense, yet again, of the female gender? nope. i will not subscribe to that notion. i will not shrug off "sex sells" as something my gender should just accept.
i can definitely understand that other feminists who are vegetarians/animal rights advocators may not mind nor be offended by peta's tactics using women the way they do. but, i am absolutely repulsed, offended, and almost painfully disappointed by it. and since my initial realization that peta had zero problem taking advantage of the female gender's oppression and/or stereotyping to further the rights of animals - i stopped supporting them both financially and verbally.
yes, "sex sells", but at what cost and to whom?

I have never seen a PETA ad except on Feministing. I don't read the magazines they advertise in and they are banned from most local TV channels. Well, I did see a series of older ads where beautiful women were wrapped in faux fur, but they were clothed underneath. So it is possible that poster has simply never been exposed to the bad PETA ads in any form.

PETA devalues ALL human life. Women especially, but honestly, they do that because it's not as socially acceptable to say you place men and children under animals, or to compare them to animals. Their advocates will say flat out that they value an ant colony more than a human child, and they will risk their own operative's lives to "save" animals that will die when released into the wild, like lab animals. They use sexism because they can't gain supporters by saying "The smallest form of life, even an ant or a clam, is equal to a human being" or "Six million Jews died in concentration camps, but six billion broiler chickens will die this year in slaughter houses" (both by Ingrid Newkirk of PETA). And then there's Regan, who when asked, "If you were aboard a lifeboat with a baby and a dog, and the boat capsized, would you rescue the baby or the dog?" replied, "(If) it were a retarded baby, and a bright dog, I'd save the dog."

Trust me, if they could get away with treating men, children, the elderly, and the mentally retarded the way they treat women, they would.