No to fur

Posts Tagged ‘blogging’

Pink and Ricky Gervais: best anti-fur clip ever

Posted by oneandonlyhypnos on March 10, 2009

As I have said before, I don’t always agree with PETA, but this new video released by the animal rights group is well done! Thumbs up on this one. Check it out for yourself:

This is the way to do activism. It’s short, funny and to the point. It gets your message out there and hopefully will help people reconsider what they put in their wardrobe.

If anyone reading this thinks he or she can defend the international fur industry: go ahead. Try me! As far as I can see it’s gross, unethical, wrong and cleary unnecessary. There, I’ve said it.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Go naked or wear fur

Posted by oneandonlyhypnos on March 6, 2009

A funny youtube clip…I couldn’t resist. Apparently they want to step into the footsteps of Christy Turlington and others in the PETA campaign: I’d rather go naked than wear fur.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

Liz Hurley loves her fur

Posted by oneandonlyhypnos on March 3, 2009

I’ve heard and read some weird and wacked out statements before in order to defend the fur trade. But this is absolutely insane. Elizabeth Hurley has recently become the new face for Blackglama. In an ad she poses in mink fur coats. During the last couple of months, this attracted some media attention. This article is the paramount of fur madness that I have ever seen. You can read this nice pice of prose here.

After nearly suffering a heart attack, caused by the rethoric and flawed logic in these statements and crazy reasoning, I decided to write of my frustrations in this little rant…

Here it comes

In Iceland, parts of the shore where the seals congregate were sold as agricultural assets. Farmers would facilitate the natural seal colonies, protecting them from predators, and once a year they’d cull them. But since the seal market has collapsed, so have the care and value of the shoreline, and so have the seals. All over the North Sea, their populations are fluctuating. They’re caught in fishing nets, shot by fishermen. They hang around ports and fish farms like water foxes. The seals have gone from being valuable, protected and plentiful, to being waterborne vermin and endangered, because we have removed their value thanks to ignorant squeamishness and class politics.

sealing is however still happening in Iceland! And yes, the number of seals in the entire North Sea is declining. But the reasons are not the ‘evil’ ethical consumers who refuse to wear fur. The BBC reported in 2002 that seals are succoumbing to a disease called the phocine distemper virus (PDV). This isn’t the first time either:

On 11 July, the scientists reported on the Common Wadden Sea Secretariat’s website that more than 1,400 dead animals had been recorded in Scandinavia and nearly 60 on the Dutch coast.

They wrote then: “The mortality of harbour seals during the 1988 outbreak in the above areas was estimated at 40 to 60 % of the population.

“It is hard to predict how many seals will die during the current PDV epidemic and this will depend on different factors, including acquired immunity, pollutant load, and general health status.”

Indeed, the number of seals has continued to decline the last couple of years, but not just the seals. As the Telegraph
reported the number of sea birds has dropped as well. Is that because we don’t turn them into coats? Or could it be that the causes of these problems are somewhat more complex than what you and certain furriers would claim? Seals are being shot, that is correct. Far to often even and totally legal (so far for sqeamishness. But it is clearly not the only problem. As we can also read here: link

There have always been people who are funny about their relationship with animals — vegetarians who got religion, a few people who swept the street in front of them so as not to hurt a flightless fly — but the majority of us, the vast, vast majority, have gone on eating anything dumb enough to taste good with chips, and squashing cockroaches wherever possible. But that odd prejudice, the fatwa on fur, has become automatic and universal in our select and ethically compromised bit of the First World. The virulence and viciousness of fur vigilantes mean that few of us now bother to brave the spittle-flecked venom of that nylon Taliban of self-righteous pressure groups and dim, new-age absolutists. The argument against fur has always been more about class and money than dumb critters.

Aside from the fact that this entire piece of prose is full of contempt for just about anyone who is against fur (which is the majority of the british, dutch, belgian, german, austrian public (and many other countries). It show the clear lacking – or unwillingness – of understanding why the public feels making animals suffer for a piece of luxury fabric is wrong.

With this remark about eating dumb animals the writer tries to defend wearing fur by comparing it to something else…eating meat. This is typical and fundamentally flawed. I refuted this sort of wacked out thinking in my previous blogpost. You can find it here: is fur the same as leather?. I don’t need to go into it further here.

The writer also seems to claim that only people in ‘the first world’ are opposed to wearing fur. This is not true either. Fur farming has been made illegal in Croatia: link. Croatia is as you well know a former member of the USSR and a so called Second world country. The majority of the population is also against fur, just like many ‘evil’ western folks. This country has also outlawed seal products of the inhumane canadian seal hunt. source. Mexico isn’t that found of seal fur either, but they aren’t the ‘First world’. source

Opposition to the fur industry seems to be more of a world wide phenomena. It’s not about being poor or rich. That’s just pure nonsense and rethoric. It’s not about class and money. This shows a clear lack of understanding of the WHY. This is the why:

What is the WHY of wearing fur. Vanity as far as I am concerned.

Now…on with the provocative statements:

Of all the animals that we kill for our personal use, mink have by far and away the easiest passing: well fed and unstressed, they’re gently gassed.

Yes, absolutely right. As we could all see in the clip above! I guess free range chickens should envy mink and foxes.

Many furriers and fur fashionista’s claim that the animals have a good life and are ‘put to sleep’ by CO or CO2 gas. They are not put to sleep, but slaughtered…putting to sleep is what the vet does. There is virtually no scientific evidence by the way that proves that these animals die a ‘humane’ death.

Cotton is an ecological nightmare. Our demands for a cheap, inexhaustible T-shirt supply cause more damage than oil wells. Cotton has to be grown as a mono-crop, so you can’t have cotton in your allotment, or sell it in the farmers’ market

Have you ever heard of organic cotton? Of Hemp clothing or other ecological alternatives? Eco-fashion is a hype these days, and it seems the fur industry is trying to ‘green up’ their image.

What about fur trim stiched to cotton or polyester clothing by the way? Or what about jeans? What’s the idea really? Jeans made from mink as the green alternative?

And if you’re still not convinced, then would you for a moment consider your own cushions, your pillow. The feathers inside, the bird fur, where do you imagine that came from?

You mean my synthetic pillow? Or the one in the store with bird feathers from animals killed for meat, who actually were able to walk around and interact and live a somewhat normal life? Yes, I now about intensive farming…an other wrong doesn’t make the other right. And not all farming is the same: free range, bio-labels,…

I could go on like this…The ‘fur warriors’ always come up with the most ridiculous excuses to wear fur. At some times it is tiresome. It is as if any logical argument that has ever been made against these insane practices just evaporates. These people are impervious to logic…or compassion.

And since so many people like the ‘I rather go naked than wear fur campaign’… Here is another clip. This time: Amanda Beard speaking out against fur.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | 1 Comment »

Is fur the same as leather?

Posted by oneandonlyhypnos on March 2, 2009

I’m fed up with hearing that fur is the same as leather. Why you might ask? Because it is an all or nothing approach to the problem. It’s black and white. Either the wearing and using of ALL animal products is bad, or it isn’t. That is simply not logical, contrary to what some people believe. You must have heard it many times during discussions on internet boards or in real life: You eat meat don’t you? Well, fur or leather is the same…and other such logical fallacies.

Actually this sort of argument is easily refuted. Most fur comes from animals that were killed specifically for their fur, contrary to leather. For leather they are normally killed primarily for food. Off course you could say that killing animals for food is not necessary and that you either most become a vegan or shut up and buy fur coats and kill even more animals (yes, that seems very ethical and quite logical).

This does not make sense, since you can justify just about anything being done to animals this way. Are you against bull fighting? You can’t, because you eat meat. And meat is cruel too! You are against cock fights? Dog fights?

We can go even a bit further and explore how logical this argument really is. By the same reasoning used to defend killing animals for luxury fur items, we could could come to some mind boggling conclusions. What would happen if we applied this way of thinking to…lets say the environment.

Are you against dumping oil into the sea? Why would you? You drive a car don’t you, that pollutes the environment too? It must be ok!!!

I don’t now what you are thinking, but there seems te be a fatal flaw in this all or nothing type of reasoning. You can use it to justify anything that you like. Perhaps it is nothing more than a self serving argument? Think about it.

Some fur fashionista’s could state that the fur industry is cruel, but less cruel than the meat industry. Again, logical errors are being made. You can’t defend the cruelties of one type of industry, by simply pointing the finger at another industry. You could do exactly the same with bull fighting or cock fighting. And some supporters of these practices actually do this (no kidding). Also, I haven’t seen any free range mink or foxes out there on these fur farms where these – essentially – wild animals are being kept in small cages.

This is free range chicken:

free range

This is a caged fox bred for fur:

fox

I don’t know about you, but I do see a significant difference.

Other people will defend fur by pointing the finger at evil animal right activists. This is also not correct. What about traditional animal welfare organizations like the RSPCA? They are also against fur. So are many other organizations. The world is bigger than PETA and their naked anti fur furisdead.com ads. But yes, animal rightists are also against fur. And indeed, I am myself also a vegetarian. But even when I was a meat eater, I was against fur. I always have been, as are many others. I can understand why people eat meat, I can respect that and I will not deny that a vegan diet has some setbacks. When you are a vegan, you have to take B12 supplements for example…because you can only get that particular vitamin from animal products (such as eggs, actually this entire matter is a difficult debate in itself). Do you have to take pills because you don’t wear fur? NO! Do we have to wear fur in order to survive? NO. Is fur humane? NO. Let’s ditch it.

The reality behind the glamour?

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | 5 Comments »

fur: the spark of a celebrity war

Posted by oneandonlyhypnos on February 19, 2009

Fur has been a controversial subject for several decades. It seems that almost no one is left without strong feelings against or pro fur. And anyone who follows the media and has not been living on the planet Mars is surely well aware of this.

The way I look at it, Hollywood and celebrities reflect our society…up to a degree off course. What lives in the media has an influence on us all. When somebody wants to make a point and wants to reach people, celebs will be involved. If you want to sell a product (fur, or for what I care a ball of string: celebs!).

Not only does it reflect our society, we often are influenced by them. They are – in their own way – powerful people and can sway public opinion.

When I turn my TV on I can see that a big and controversial subject – the theme of this blog by the way – is being fought on the small/big screen, in the tabloids, blogs, sites, magazines,…

And that subject is fur. Is it ethical to farm animals for fur? Is it o.k. to trap animals and kill theme to have a little bit of trim? People feel strongly about this, not just activists, but just about everybody it seems.

There seems to be some sort of divide in society, some are totally against and others totally pro. There is no doubt about it, the ‘battle’ of fur rages in the media. Take this recent article for example: celebs wearinf fur

It shows pictures of celebrities turning to fur as a ‘fashion statement’: people included are Eva Longoria, Jessica Simpson, Kelly Rowland or Demi Moore. Naturally not left without respons from animal right protesters, welfarists and others.

On the other side we can find people like Pamela Anderson, Pink (Alicia Moore), Christina Applegate, Jamelia, Christy Turlington, Christina Aguilera (wears only fake fur) or singer Leona Lewis

Lewis for example is a woman who clearly feels very strongly about fur, as she is quoted as saying:

She added to Britain’s Hello! magazine: “I don’t have anything against the store or the owner – all I am against is fur. I think it’s totally cruel and I can’t endorse or support anything related to that as it’s against my beliefs, no matter what you pay me.

Apparently she turned down one million pounds to open a shop that sells fur (this proves off course: if you want to sell something, try to use celebs). Personally, I have a lot of respect for that.

Anyways…with this small opening post I just wanted to make clear what this blog is about: fur and how society looks at it, the ethics of it all, pro’s and cons, fur addicted celebrities and the anti-fur celebs battling it out… It is going to be an interesting ride.

OK…I could not resist it, just about any site on the net about this topic is apparently packing at least one PETA poster against fur…here is mine

Christy Turlington

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »