Thursday, 13 January 2011

THINK WEARING FUR IS OK? READ THIS FROM PETA

Posted by Fashion Editor at Large

I've long been an advocate of the anti-fur movement. Though increasingly I get the sense that concerns such as PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals) are fighting a losing battle against fur-loving fashionistas. I was reassured that they haven't given up the fight today when the below email arrived from Mandy Carter of PETA. The video footage linked below is harrowing but neccessary viewing.

A deluded young sophisticate with her mink fur and a Babycham

Dear Melanie,
I am writing on behalf of PETA UK – an affiliate of PETA US, the largest animal rights organisation in the world, which has more than 2 million members and supporters. As someone who reports on fashion, you play a vital role in keeping your readers informed about all aspects of the fashion trade, including the ethical implications. In an attempt to sell more of its products, the fur industry spreads a great deal of misinformation about conditions for animals raised and killed for their fur. With London Fashion Week approaching, we hope you will allow us to share some information that we believe will be useful in offering your readers a truly balanced account of the fur business.

Most people are aware of some of the suffering that animals endure at the hands of the fur industry, but the reality is often even crueller than the image they hold. The fur industry promotes the idea that European fur farms have higher welfare standards, but animals on these farms suffer fates just as terrifying and agonising as animals elsewhere in the world. Indeed, new video footage captured during an investigation into Swedish fur farms has exposed the horror inflicted on animals in Europe. Please note that this video was not taken on isolated, rogue farms; the footage from Sweden was filmed during visits to 20 per cent of that country's mink farms, while a similarly shocking video was shot at 30 separate farms across Finland.

For the last London Fashion Week, singer Natalie Imbruglia narrated a video for PETA about the fur trade, showing how animals killed for their fur are commonly skinned alive, how mother animals who become caught in traps in the wild often chew off their own limbs in a desperate attempt to return to their babies and how 2 million cats and dogs are killed for their fur every single year in China.

Although these videos are difficult to watch, I implore you to take a few moments to do so, as they will help you provide a more complete portrait of fur industry practices to your readers. As on other farms on which animals endure intensive confinement – often driven mad by isolation and frustration – fur factory farms are designed to maximise profits at the expense of animals' well-being. Because fur farmers care only about preserving the quality of the fur, they use slaughter methods that keep the pelts intact but can result in extreme suffering for the animals. Small animals may be crammed into boxes and poisoned with hot, unfiltered engine exhaust from a truck. Engine exhaust is not always lethal, and some animals wake up while they are being skinned. Larger animals have clamps attached to their bodies or rods forced into their mouths or their anuses, by which they are painfully electrocuted. Gassing and neck-breaking are other common slaughter methods on fur factory farms.

Public opinion polls consistently show that the vast majority of people are strongly opposed to wearing animal fur, and a 2010 survey by the RSPCA showed that 95 per cent of the public say that they would never wear it. The list of stylish women who shun fur include Hollywood A-listers such as Eva Mendes, Kate Winslet and Charlize Theron; first ladies Carla Sarkozy and Michelle Obama; the music industry's biggest stars, including Leona Lewis and Pink; and teen favourites Fearne Cotton and Kelly Osbourne.

Top fashion designers including Stella McCartney, Vivienne Westwood, Ralph Lauren and Tommy Hilfiger refuse to use real fur in their collections. And from large department stores such as Harvey Nichols and Selfridges to fashionable High Street retailers such as AllSaints and Topshop, more and more compassionate retailers are implementing fur-free policies.




I have taken the liberty of including some answers to commonly asked questions about fur,

Is vintage fur OK?
Some people have been misguided as to the ethics of vintage fur. All "vintage" means is that the animals were killed long ago, but whether animals suffered and died yesterday or 50 years ago, all fur sends the same unacceptable message: that it is OK to torment animals and rip the skin off their backs in the name of fashion.

 Marlene Dietrich wearing the real deal.

Isn't real fur better for the environment?
Real fur is environmentally unfriendly. Toxic chemicals are used to preserve and process the skins, and waste from processing plants and fur farms poisons rivers and streams. It also takes 20 times as much energy to process a coat made from animal fur as it does one made from fake fur! And fur coats are not biodegradable – they are coated in chemicals to stop them from rotting.

 Topshop do brilliant faux fur (£100)

Is rabbit fur a by-product of the meat industry?
The fur industry likes to tell the public that the rabbit fur used for outerwear, trim and accessories is a by-product of the rabbit-meat industry. The truth is that the rabbit-fur industry demands the thicker pelt of an older animal. Rabbits who are used for meat are usually killed at the tender age of between 10 and 12 weeks; this means the rabbits who are raised and killed for meat are not the same rabbits who are killed for their fur. Our undercover exposé shows how these gentle creatures scream during slaughter.



Isn't fur carrying the "Origin Assured" label OK?
The fur industry's "Origin Assured" (OA) label is a shameless attempt to make consumers feel good about buying an inherently cruel product. The labelling in no way translates into acceptable treatment of animals who are killed for their fur.
In the US, which is one of the countries included on the OA list, not a single humane-slaughter law protects animals on fur farms. This means that after spending their entire lives in tiny wire cages where they often go insane from confinement, animals on these fur farms can have their necks broken, be gassed or have rods forced into their anuses through which they are painfully electrocuted. Compassionate consumers know that the only truly ethical fur is faux.



Don't we have an excuse to wear fur in this cold weather?
This is one of the most ludicrous of all the fur industry's arguments. When mountaineers climb Mount Everest, they don't do it in mink coats! There are countless modern, human-made fibres which are warmer, lighter and more weather-proof than fur. The fact is, some people advocate the killing of millions of animals simply because they like the way it looks. With all the chic, cruelty-free options available, there's no reason to steal animals' skins in order to keep warm.

Woolrich: keeping  Editors snug during cold fashion weeks

Very sincerely yours
Mandy Carter
Special Projects Coordinator
People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals
Tel +44 (0) 20 7357 9229 ext #244

30 comments:

  1. Thank you for posting this, especially the info on how real fur is not actually better for the environment I am sick of hearing that as an excuse, same for 'its vintage'. I just cannot believe how fur has made such a big come back this season, it is disgusting especially when there is simply no need for it, the modern day faux-furs are so nice why would any one want real.

    ReplyDelete
  2. "Our undercover exposé shows how these gentle creatures scream during slaughter."

    That part made me wince. How anyone can slaughter poor, helpless animals when it's completely unnecessary is just horrific.

    http://keeping-it-fierce.blogspot.com

    ReplyDelete
  3. As long as there is a demand, this battle will never end. I went vegan a year ago, and the more I learn, the more appalled I am at the unlimited barbaric lengths corporations will go, all in the name of the all-mighty dollar. However minimal my individual impact may be, I will continue to uphold my place in the battle, even if all I achieve is a guilt-free slumber.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Fur is never OK, and there are other more stylish ways of keeping warm ie a quilted Moncler jacket.

    ReplyDelete
  5. What a brilliant and brave post. I have become so bored of people using the 'it's vintage' excuse to wear fur - in 20 years time, fur products that are being made now will be considered vintage, does that make them ok to wear!? Time doesn't detract from the terrible realities of the fur industry. Thanks for posting this x

    ReplyDelete
  6. Dear Melanie,

    While I have been a big fan of your blog for some time, it saddens me to see you simply re-posting the biased, false information that PETA publicizes. First of all, I find it odd that you support PETA, however they are also against the use of leather, the ownership of pets, and the use of animal testing. I am judging by your blog posts that you probably own quite a few pairs of leather shoes, and I am sure many of your beauty products have been tested on animals. I am also quite sure that you or your partner or family have treated an illness with a pharmaceutical that has been tested on animals. So why be against the fur industry, when you support the killing of animals for other uses? Did you know that in North America (I don't have statistics for the UK) 7-8 million animals are killed for fur, while 25 million are killed for research, 400 million are road kill and killed in shelters, and 12 billion are used for food. So why isolate the fur industry? Will you write a post about Tesco's being cruel for selling steaks?

    Also, I have visited a mink farm, and I can tell you right now that the treatment of animals raised for fur is much, much better than those raised for food. You can stick a battery chicken in a tiny cage, pump it with steroids, and still get a decent chicken breast. However, the priority of a mink farmer is to keep their animals well-fed, happy, and stress-free. What is the first thing you notice when an animal is mal-treated or malnourished? Their fur goes. So I can assure you that it is within the best interests of the fur farmers to keep their animals very happy.

    Also the videos that PETA are showing are probably either 20 years old (where regulations were much more relaxed, this is no longer the case in European and North American countries, regulations on raising fur bearer are extremely strict to ensure the highest of ethical standards) or fabricated. PETA have a habit of doing this, they publicized a video of a man skinning an animal alive, and it was discovered that they had paid someone in China $500 to make the video. No one would skin an animal alive, not only is it completely unethical, it is also dangerous for the person skinning, and a beating heart will mean that blood gets all over the fur and therefore damages the pelts.

    Their arguments about the chemicals are also baseless. Most of the chemicals that PETA routinely accuses the fur industry of using are in fact the ones associated with leather tanning. Fur is not tanned, it is dressed. If you pour harsh chemicals on a soft pelt, it will be destroyed (in leather, the goal IS to remove the fur from the leather, whereas in fur dressing, it is to protect it). Fur dressing uses primarily very mild products (alum salts) and although there are a few chemicals used in dyeing, this is no different to the chemicals uses in dying cotton, wool, or leather.

    Fur, when sourced ethically, is in fact a very green option in fashion. It is sustainable, biodegradable, long-lasting, and local (if you live in Scandinavia or North America.) What, may I ask, do you wear in the winter? Wool? I'd read up on the suffering the sheeps go through when they are razed. Synthetic fabrics? This is neither sustainable, nor environmental (look at the Gulf of Mexico oil spill.)

    Fur needs to be treated the same way as all of our other fashion products: buy smart. Just because battery chickens exit, doesn't mean we don't buy any chicken at all. Same should go with fur. Buy Origin Assured, or from reputable dealers, and you know the animals have been treated well. And what makes more sense? To buy one fur coat every five or ten years, or to buy one new wool/synthetic coat every season?

    Alexandra

    p.s. I'd also suggest you check out www.petakillsanimals.com, a very interesting website about this so-called animal rights association.

    ReplyDelete
  7. PART 1

    Dear Melanie,

    While I have been a big fan of your blog for some time, it saddens me to see you simply re-posting the biased, false information that PETA publicizes. First of all, I find it odd that you support PETA, however they are also against the use of leather, the ownership of pets, and the use of animal testing. I am judging by your blog posts that you probably own quite a few pairs of leather shoes, and I am sure many of your beauty products have been tested on animals. I am also quite sure that you or your partner or family have treated an illness with a pharmaceutical that has been tested on animals. So why be against the fur industry, when you support the killing of animals for other uses? Did you know that in North America (I don't have statistics for the UK) 7-8 million animals are killed for fur, while 25 million are killed for research, 400 million are road kill and killed in shelters, and 12 billion are used for food. So why isolate the fur industry? Will you write a post about Tesco's being cruel for selling steaks?

    Also, I have visited a mink farm, and I can tell you right now that the treatment of animals raised for fur is much, much better than those raised for food. You can stick a battery chicken in a tiny cage, pump it with steroids, and still get a decent chicken breast. However, the priority of a mink farmer is to keep their animals well-fed, happy, and stress-free. What is the first thing you notice when an animal is mal-treated or malnourished? Their fur goes. So I can assure you that it is within the best interests of the fur farmers to keep their animals very happy.

    Also the videos that PETA are showing are probably either 20 years old (where regulations were much more relaxed, this is no longer the case in European and North American countries, regulations on raising fur bearer are extremely strict to ensure the highest of ethical standards) or fabricated. PETA have a habit of doing this, they publicized a video of a man skinning an animal alive, and it was discovered that they had paid someone in China $500 to make the video. No one would skin an animal alive, not only is it completely unethical, it is also dangerous for the person skinning, and a beating heart will mean that blood gets all over the fur and therefore damages the pelts.

    ReplyDelete
  8. PART 2


    Also the videos that PETA are showing are probably either 20 years old (where regulations were much more relaxed, this is no longer the case in European and North American countries, regulations on raising fur bearer are extremely strict to ensure the highest of ethical standards) or fabricated. PETA have a habit of doing this, they publicized a video of a man skinning an animal alive, and it was discovered that they had paid someone in China $500 to make the video. No one would skin an animal alive, not only is it completely unethical, it is also dangerous for the person skinning, and a beating heart will mean that blood gets all over the fur and therefore damages the pelts.

    Their arguments about the chemicals are also baseless. Most of the chemicals that PETA routinely accuses the fur industry of using are in fact the ones associated with leather tanning. Fur is not tanned, it is dressed. If you pour harsh chemicals on a soft pelt, it will be destroyed (in leather, the goal IS to remove the fur from the leather, whereas in fur dressing, it is to protect it). Fur dressing uses primarily very mild products (alum salts) and although there are a few chemicals used in dyeing, this is no different to the chemicals uses in dying cotton, wool, or leather.

    Fur, when sourced ethically, is in fact a very green option in fashion. It is sustainable, biodegradable, long-lasting, and local (if you live in Scandinavia or North America.) What, may I ask, do you wear in the winter? Wool? I'd read up on the suffering the sheeps go through when they are razed. Synthetic fabrics? This is neither sustainable, nor environmental (look at the Gulf of Mexico oil spill.)

    ReplyDelete
  9. PART 3 (sorry for this long comment, but I felt these issues needed to be addressed.

    Fur needs to be treated the same way as all of our other fashion products: buy smart. Just because battery chickens exit, doesn't mean we don't buy any chicken at all. Same should go with fur. Buy Origin Assured, or from reputable dealers, and you know the animals have been treated well. And what makes more sense? To buy one fur coat every five or ten years, or to buy one new wool/synthetic coat every season?

    Alexandra

    p.s. I'd also suggest you check out www.petakillsanimals.com, a very interesting website about this so-called animal rights association.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Seeming for glamour and new style of chanel replica handbags? At Beubag.com , chanel replica handbags genuinely offer the panache of the real thing, at a fraction of the original designer price.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Fashion Editor at Large14 January 2011 08:34

    Hello Alexandra,

    I'm guessing you work within the fur industry and that it is your job to counter-balance PETA campiagning by rubbishing their work.

    Well I'm having none of it. Fur farming is unneccessary and cruel, just lining pockets.
    I occasionally eat meat, and do wear wool and leather but that works for me and most people as we wear these animals and it is part of the natural order.

    I do not wear mink and fox and I am sure you don't either.

    Melanie

    ReplyDelete
  12. Fashion Editor at Large14 January 2011 08:37

    Alexandra I do appreciate you taking the time to put across your pro-fur anti-PETA views. I welcome this on my blog.

    Best wishes,

    Melanie

    ReplyDelete
  13. Quite frankly anyone who condones fur wearing in our climates (and i include the US in this category) is in need of a major reality check. Killing minks and foxes for pelts is totally unnecessary. Thank you fir posting this!

    ReplyDelete
  14. Melanie,
    Unless you eat wild meat and wear "wild" leather, then farming for food is absolutely no different than farming for fur. In fact, it is usually worse. (Btw, free range means the chickens can run around in a barn, and have a window, it doesn't mean they are running free in someone's back yard.) I did recently start working in the fur industry, but only because I was disgusted about the way the animals rights activists target small, family run fur business because they are easy victims. When was the last time PETA went up against Safeway for selling meat?
    And by the way, one third of the furs in Canada are wild, therefore not farmed. So if you against fur farming, then buy beaver, fox, coyote, etc... It is sustainable, biodegradable, longer lasting, and much warmer than wool.
    While I respect someone who chooses not to wear fur, I find it surprising that you say wearing wool and leather is part of the natural order, whereas fur isn't? Isn't that slightly hypocritical? Perhaps you'd like to familiarize yourself with the aboriginal people in Canada, who not only wear fur, but also depend on the fur industry for survival.
    Anyway, if you don't want to wear fur, then fine. But please don't tell me you support any organization that terrorizes people who choose to do so. They have every right to campaign against the use of animals, but for them to verbally abuse anyone who does choose to wear fur is completely wrong. People should have the right to wear what they want, without being intimidated and attacked.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Fashion Editor at Large15 January 2011 07:13

    Hi again Alexandra,

    You made my point for me. The aboriginal people of Canada wearing fur IS the natural order of things. Me wearing leftovers of what I eat feels like the natural order. I don't know enought about the leather industry to comment. I need to know more.

    Your issue seems to be with the people at PETA.

    Melanie

    ReplyDelete
  16. Hi Melanie,
    Yes, I'd suggest you look into how sheep are sheared, as well as the leather industry. Just because it is a byproduct of what you eat, doesn't mean the animals are treated any more ethically. And also, mink remains are turned into cosmetics and biofuels, so they aren't just wasted. Lastly, you should look outside PETA for information on mink farms, I have been to one and it was incredible how well the animals were treated and fed (well-treated animals are the only way to have great pelts.)
    Anyway, thank you very much for taking the time to respond to my comments.
    Alexandra

    ReplyDelete
  17. The wearing of fur by humans outside of arctic/freezing communities is obscene, ostentatious and purely for the sake of vanity. It is not stylish in ANY sense. It is just another tool for tasteless and vulgar people to display whatever wealth they have. Pathetic.

    ReplyDelete
  18. I’m heartened to read this blog Melanie and to hear what a kind heartened person you are, keep up the good work.
    Being a fan of PETA also, I wanted to address a couple of the ridiculous points made by the pro fur lobby.
    ALL the footage that PETA has linked to is recent- it even says so on the websites. The letter states that the footage from Sweden was shot on 20% of mink farms over a year and a half from 2009- 2010 (not 20 years ago!) so it’s not like they are isolated incidents. And the footage from Finland was filmed on 30 separate farms also within the last two years. To suggest otherwise is simply a desperate attempt to justify an appalling industry.

    Just because animals suffer in other industries as well is not a justification for their continued suffering on fur farms or in traps. We should all try to alleviate suffering wherever we can and avoiding fur is one of the easiest positive steps we can take. It is very difficult to live your life without causing any harm; but that doesn’t mean we should intentionally cause unnecessary harm or choose to do nothing.


    To suggest that PETA paid someone to skin an animal alive is utterly ludicrous and disgusting. In fact many animals are skinned alive each year for the fur industry. For example, vet reports consistently show that over 40% of seals hunted during the Canadian Seal slaughter have their skinned ripped off whilst they’re still conscious. Or perhaps PETA have been paying the seal clubbers off too?!

    The fur trade is one of the most horrific, unnecessary, cruel industries on earth. It must end.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Dear Anonymous,

    I'd suggest you actually do some research on both sides of the story, rather than just regurgitate what PETA tells you. Usually I don't waste my time with people who believe everything that PETA says without question, but I need to clarify the facts around skinning animals alive. PETA did pay to have that video made, it simply does not happen in the fur industry and here is why:

    1 - it is highly unethical and illegal
    2 - the person skinning is at risk of being attacked, bitten, or scratched by the animal
    3 - a beating heart means blood being pumped all over the place. This results in the pelt being ruined by blood, which completely defeats the purpose of the fur trade.
    4 - according to PETA's video (there has been no research done by the fur industry in skinning animals alive, it is simply not an option) it took upwards of 30 minutes to skin the animal, while a dead animal gets skinned in less than 5 minutes.

    So it is uneconomical, unethical, and dangerous, and therefore not done. I don't have a problem with people who are anti-fur, everyone has a right to make their own decisions in life, but to make false, sweeping statements about animals being skinned alive or that it is the "most horrific" industry on earth shows you are ignorant and have not done your research.

    Alexandra

    ReplyDelete
  20. Hi Alexandra,
    I have a suggestion for you - get some compassion instead of being a pimp for the fur trade.

    Unlike you I do need to keep slating an organisation trying to do good by helping animals, the facts speak for themselves - fur is utterly wrong.

    Shame you hide under an alias- PETA might have something to say about your false and disgusting claims.

    Skinning animals alive is not the only thing the fur trade do wrong, check out the letter in the column for the others. Ultimately there is no justification for killing an animal just because you like the look of their fur, and you're getting desperate now by continuing to try and bring PETA down.

    ReplyDelete
  21. There is obviously no point trying to argue with someone who has obviously not done any un-biased research into the subject, so I'll simply end this discussion by saying that I am not desperate. The fur industry is making an incredible recovery after years of being unfairly victimized by animal rights activists. Look at the catwalks, I haven't seen a single menswear show that doesn't have fur. Prada even did fur for spring summer. So no, I am not desperate, I am very proud that the industry my country was founded on is making a recovery.

    ReplyDelete
  22. good god, hard to believe, that you, Alexandra, actually bother visiting sites like these. Everything on my mind was already said by someone else, you make me sad, and sick to my stomach. I bet you own fur clothes, and all you do is justify it by looking up these lying articles that are supposed to impugn FACTS! who the f cares, if anyone was paid to skin animals alive, the point is, that it HAPPENS. get a grip, woman.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Great post :) It's well thought out and isn't just a lot of rambling. However, if you allow me to say so there are two things I disagree on - the wearing of faux fur and "That's not my age"'s comment. Faux fur - it looks a lot like the real thing so you are still promoting the image of fur by wearing faux. And as for the comment I mentioned, Dear "That's not my age" - Moncler jackets are down-filled. Down is plucked from geese that are fully conscious so the pain is still massive, so if you're against fur, you might as well be against down. I hope this comment doesn't get anyone up in arms about anything.

    ReplyDelete
  24. by the way @Searching for Style - I hope you see this. Could you please take a look at this and give me your feedback on it? I'd highly appreciate it :) http://www.rantingalamode.com/2010/08/fur-my-thoughts.html

    ReplyDelete
  25. Hi there, to be honest I see everyone's point of view but I'm teetering towards 'Searching for Style '. She makes a range of valid points. To eat meat and wear leather and wool is no different than wearing fur. I'm not saying all my wardrobe is lined with fur and I wear deer head hat and wear Betsy the cow on my feet.
    I'm simply stating, it is ENTIRELY hypocritical to berate someone about their views then adopt a little bit of that lifestyle yourself.
    If one chooses to wear fur but buy free range eggs or if one does not wear fur but occasionally wears leather, well that is up to the individual, just don't slander those that have a different view.
    I mean if you're talking about the ethical value of fur, then why not talk about clothing that is probably sewn by a small child in south Asia for 5p an hour? or sweat shops where employees have their passport taken from them and made to work 18hr work days? where the ethicalness on that? What, you make all your own clothes now?
    OR downloading illegal films where it helps the drug and trafficking industry? the list is endless.
    No one is a perfect human beings with high morals and ethics.
    I hope this comment does make people think about pointing fingers. The next time you have a go to someone about fur or leather? Try looking at your £5 dress from Primak and see if you can find the Fair Trade logo..no? hmmmm

    ReplyDelete
  26. I think there is valid points on both sides. However, I think PETA is fighting a losing cause. They would be able to get more results by not being so extreme in their demands. Don't get me wrong, I am completely against the harming of animals but unfortunately the dollar is a more motivating factor for many people (be it profits or being able to $5 for a top for a consumer). I think the solution to this problem would be to legislate how the animal is euthanised e.g. lethal injections for the animal - this wouldn't harm the pelt, the animal wouldn't suffer and no fur farmer could object to this. Yes, the cost of drugs may be expensive initially but the ability to sell more fur as more people would feel better wearing it is better in the long run.

    Regarding the vintage fur. Yes, you're right; we don't know the methods that these animals were killed but it also means that we're not adding to profits from current fur companies where their method of killing is known and cruel. So yes it does help in some way.

    ReplyDelete
  27. if you've seen The Rows collection for Fall 2011 NYFW you will be appalled. I hate them to the bones. one day i'll be so friggin rich and I will skin Mary-Kate and Ashley Olsen alive and put rods up their anuses and electrocute them... I'll use their skins as rugs.. for my dogs to sleep on.

    ReplyDelete
  28. So much fur in the AW11 collections, it looks like a big trend that is growing. Many say fake fur is just as bad: synthetic nylon that takes 600 years to biodegrade and requires harmful chemicals for production. As an accessories designer, I'm expecting a barrage of requests for fur and wonder if I should say NO to fur whatever it's origin.
    What do you think?

    ReplyDelete
  29. Melissa Williams31 May 2011 23:26

    Wearing fur is no more cruel than eating meat, except the fur item will last 50+ years and the meat item will be in the toilet the next day!

    I have found that no other clothing can compare to a real furs durability and warmth, a fur coat will last at least 50 years. Think of how many synthetic coats you would go through in that same period.... toxic pollution and non-biodegradable waste anyone?

    The meat of the fur bearing animal is a by-product, not much is wasted. The left overs get turned into pet food ingredients, oils for cosmetics, organic garden fertilizer and bio-fuels...

    Yes it's at the expense of an animals life, but I don't have any mayjor issues with eating meat or eggs, which are literally in the toilet the next day - and are not needed to be consumed to survive.

    Therefore I cannot understand why I am supposed to be opposed to fur but be fine with everything else animal derived?

    And, no I do not work for a 'fur industry' (as much as you wish i did so you would have a counter argument) - i just know how to research unbiasedly and think for myself instead of being a PeTArd sheep

    ReplyDelete
  30. Melissa, In some ways your right, and in others wrong. I am a vegan but only for one year and I certainly don't judge others who choose to eat meat. But there is a huge difference (that didn't exist 300 years ago in the U.S.). My early ancestors were fur trappers in NY State 300 years ago and learned the trade from the Native Americans. It was a basic necessity; as; when Euro traders came, fur is what they needed, and weaponry they made is what we needed. Made trade run smooth. Today, fur is not a basic, but a vanity item. It is the result of coveting an animal's rightfully owned fur and skin, for your comfort. On the other hand, for those who choose to eat meat, fish, etc. it is a form of nutrition that has nothing to do with vanity. I do suggest, however to expose yourself to a few youtube videos to make wiser choices in meat; not just because the animals experience less suffering on most small family farms (than factory farming) but it is a lot healthier for you. One of the best I've seen is "Glass Walls" by Paul McCartney. Very educational. My wife and I also don't use leather because now, it is no longer a basic; there are plenty of other much higher quality materials for the same or lesser price. Good luck in whatever your quest. Of course wear fur if that is "your thing" but please do be educated, as science knows so much more today than they did even a decade ago regarding fur animals ability to think, reason, be with their lifelong families etc. Some of the YouTube videos on that topic also helped make me thing, and think long and hard. I'd eaten meat, fish and chicken for almost 55 years before finally stopping. My last holdout was sushi. I am so much healthier now, and climb about 3 mountains daily (we live in a National Park) that's 4-6 miles (after 2 major heart attacks in my meat-eating days) when getting to the kitchen or bathroom was quite a chore.

    ReplyDelete

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...