MIT animal rights group draws attention, but students question its impact
The people behind the “try our dog cookie” signs have a message, but is it getting through?
When 10 MIT students were asked whether they had heard of the animal rights group “Allied Scholars,” only two recognized the name. However, when asked whether they had seen a group across from Lobby 7 showing videos of animals in cages or holding signs reading “try our dog cookie,” all 10 immediately knew what was being referenced.
Allied Scholars for Animal Protection is a national organization with chapters at colleges across the country aiming to promote animal rights and encourage plant-based diets. In an interview with Animal Advocacy Careers, founder and CEO Dr. Faraz Harsini explained that his interest in animal advocacy began while conducting cancer research. There, Harsini learned that animal consumption contributes to major health issues such as cancer, diabetes, and heart disease, along with environmental damage and animal suffering. “I realized that helping animals is among the best things I can do to help humans,” he said.
Harsini founded a student advocacy group for animal rights during graduate school, only to see it dissolve after he graduated. That experience led him to create Allied Scholars. “I’m aiming to construct a strong network of impactful college animal advocates across the country,” he said in the above interview. “We want to make sure that every college student is exposed to the animal rights message.”
At MIT, that message is often delivered through tabling events in high-traffic areas such as Lobby 10, where students pass displays of graphic footage showing factory farming practices.
One Wellesley sophomore, interviewed after passing the Allied Scholars display, said the group’s messaging often lacks clarity. “I do notice it… especially with the blue and yellow background,” she remarked. “However, it doesn’t really explain on the poster what they mean. And I see the videos, but unless you stand and watch them, you’re not going to have any emotional change. When you're rushing to class, you don’t have time to look.”
Other students expressed stronger reservations. Kristen DiConza ’27 and Michelle Peng ’27, two MIT students who were familiar with the group, expressed how the tone of the outreach can feel off-putting.
“I have noticed that they’re raising awareness,” DiConza said. “But sometimes I feel like they’re doing it in an aggressive way, like saying ‘Come try dog cookies,’ and it makes me uncomfortable, so I don’t want to talk to them.”
Both students said they were not vegan and had no immediate plans to change their diets. DiConza also cited the logistical challenges of maintaining a restrictive diet in college. “It’s hard enough to plan out meals already,” she explained. “I’ve eaten animal products my whole life, so it would be complicated to reconstruct my whole diet.”
Peng pointed to the cultural factors influencing her hesitation to change her diet. “I am Chinese-American, and many dishes I grew up with incorporate different types of proteins,” she said. “It’s something I am accustomed to and would be hard to change.”
Students were presented with both moral and environmental arguments from an Allied Scholars member who wishes to remain anonymous and was interviewed while tabling.
The advocate argued that animals, while not moral agents, are “moral patients” deserving of consideration because they are sentient. She emphasized that morality should not be based on what is natural or historically common, pointing to examples such as violence in nature and slavery in human history, and framed animal agriculture as an unnecessary modern injustice.
She also presented environmental concerns, arguing that a global diet centered on meat, dairy, and eggs would require more than seven Earths’ worth of land, and that plant-based diets are significantly more resource-efficient.
Both DiConza and Peng acknowledged some validity in the advocate’s argument, but they ultimately remained unconvinced.
“I think the environmental point would make me reconsider a little bit,” DiConza said, adding that she might consider reducing meat consumption through something like “meatless Mondays.” However, she rejected the group’s moral comparisons. “Trying to compare eating animal products to slavery is a gross overcomparison and doesn’t help anyone,” she said.
Peng echoed a similar sentiment. “I understand their point of view and think they are making great points,” she said. “However, eating animal products is pretty integrated into my diet, and switching would be very difficult.”
Allied Scholars maintain a highly visible presence on campus, but student responses suggest that visibility does not always translate to impact. While the message is widely seen, how it is delivered may limit its ability to drive meaningful change.