View Full Version : The Ethics of Wearing Furs
Tue, 4th Feb '03, 9:07pm
Well, people, I'd like to ask your opinions on the subject of wearing furs, Is it right? Is it wrong? Should all the animals be let free? Do YOU wear furs? What do you say?
I personally am more or less neutral on the subject. I think that farming animals for their fur is just one more way of making a living. So hat if it's their fur that is used? We use the skins of the dead animals as well. I am not an enthusiast on the subject. You don't find me drooling after some fur coat, wishing "Oh, how I wish I had one." I don't like the idea of poor little animals on little cages. But in proper enviroment and care, I see no problem with it... objectively.
Subjectively I am still going "aww, they should be free" over them. But if they WERE let free, that would be bad. the so-called "kettutytöt", "Fox-girls", here in Finland have let animals who have been penned for their fuir free, with disastrous results for not only for the animals themselves who have bee incapable for fending for themselves in nature, but for the animal population of the areas where this has happened as well. I think actions like this these are foolish... it's the animals who suffer.
Do I wear furs myself? Yes. I own a hat and a collar made of fur, both bough second-hand. I am not ready to support killing animals by paying obscene amounts of money for a piece of a dead animal's carcass. But given the chance to get a good.looking piece of clothing at a reasonable, hell, practically free, price? Hell yeah!
I wonder how many people opposed wearing furs because they envy people who can afford to wear them and they themselves cannot? *ducks from flames* JUust a thought! Nothing more!
I know all the ethical reasons why I should oppose wearing furs, but apparently, given the chance, the vanity wins in the heart of this one.
(Waiting for the flames now)
Tue, 4th Feb '03, 9:13pm
Fur rocks. I can very well see a point in wearing fur - the furry side preferrably inside as that serves a function. I can't understand the morons who despise wearing furs or even go to attack fur wearers. Fur is a functional and useful clothing material in cold climate. I can't see a point in wearing a leopard coat for the sake of luxury though. That's decadent.
When we eat meat there is no reason to waste the fur. Sure the conditions in which some of the fur-animals in the farms live in are hard somtimes, however, not so at least here in germany.
I remember a case when anti-fur fanatics *freed* american minks from a fur farm in bavaria - where the agressive minks wreaked havoc on the local natural resort and wiped out the entire population of 5 races of rare birds there. These idiots should be shot. That much for enviromental protection :flaming: Emotionalistic and moronic scum :flaming:
[ February 04, 2003, 21:15: Message edited by: Ragusa ]
Tue, 4th Feb '03, 9:17pm
Ara, I don't think that farming animals is bad. What I'm against is termination of species. Like Tasmanian tiger. Check on the net why this nice beast doesn't exist any more.
Tue, 4th Feb '03, 9:23pm
I once worked at Macy's and quit because they sold furs. In the case of furs, the animals suffers simply because of human vanity. I am opposed to the manufacturing of fur coats.
But a lot of people, and I am sure some will say this here, ask, "well you wear leather shoes, don't you?" "You eat meat, don't you?"
But there is a major difference there.
When cattle are slaughtered, it is usually quick. The hide is used for clothing, the meat is used, bones can be grinded up for various purposes. Most of the animal is used for something. In the case of furs, do you know how they do it? THe animal HAS to be skinned alive. If the animal is dead, the skin does not come off as easily. Also, in the case of fox or mink, when the animal dies, it releases everything from their scent glands, so the fur is ruined. So they take the animal, hook it on a hook and dip the animal into boiling water. The animal is then strung up, sliced and the skin is pulled off. All while the animal is still alive. It is actually much more graphic then that.
I used to be against the use of alligator skins used for clothing and accesories. But I am not anymore. The alligator used to be hunted and harvested just for their skin. The body was left to rot. Sometimes tails of feet would be chopped off while the animal was till alive. The alligator was being pushed to extinction. But now, alligators (in the US at least) are grown on farms. Animals are selected and then the animal us used for meat, skin, etc. Just like cattle. The alligator is now not even listed as threatened! The animals are not even alive when parts are taken. Its much better for the animal and everything is used.
This could never really happen with furs because there is not much meat, etc. However, if there was a way, it would be a great improvement for how it is done now. But, the technology is there to produce synthetic fur. Personally, I can't tell a difference.
As for the
I wonder how many people opposed wearing furs because they envy people who can afford to wear them and they themselves cannot?I am all for someone who has more money than me. If they worked hard, and earned it (legally of course) more power to them. Why shouldn't they buy things they can afford that I can't.
Tue, 4th Feb '03, 9:26pm
Well, I don't mind if they skinned an animal that is going to be slaughtered anyway (ie. cows) but skinning an animal that nothing else other than the fur that can be used... that's unethical. As such, wearing a fur coat... pointless killing, and you're just encouraging it.
Like Extremist said, termination of the species. It can lead to that.
Tue, 4th Feb '03, 9:42pm
Should this topic be extened to include leather, as well? I think that's a little different, because the skin left over after the animal has been used for food is being put to a good use instead of wasted.
Anyway, fur. Wearing the skins of animals that aren't eaten (by humans, at any rate). Given the stipulation that the animals are farmed humanely and do not suffer, I don't have a problem with it. It's a resource, just like a mineral that's taken from the ground or a food crop that's harvested. The trick is in using the available resources wisely.
I live in a suburban area where there are plenty of deer and rabbits, but no predators. Consequently, the animals aren't very healthy and invade gardens looking for food. Yet every year, the population control measures draw heated protests. If mankind has a responsibility to take care of the earth and manage its resources, that has to include population control in this case.
I have a fur coat that's older than I am (was my mother's) and I pulled it out during a recent cold spell. Wow, was I toasty! That said, I doubt I'd go out of my way to replace it if something should happen to it.
Tue, 4th Feb '03, 9:43pm
Not it "can lead" to the termination of a species. It will. In the case of alligators, there was enough of an economic need. In the case of fur animals. since they are so expensive, the economic need is not there.
Tue, 4th Feb '03, 9:47pm
I've checked what Elios posted and it's not like that in all cases (animals are not always skinned alive). But chasing all around to find something more about fur business which I know nothing about, I've found a certain pic.
Please adults and people with good nerves ONLY! (http://www.furisdead.com/images/sophiebig.jpg)
If anyone is recruiting, I'm willing to apply to his/her anti-fur-use party!
Wed, 5th Feb '03, 4:29am
Extremist, just curious where you found that information? I'm not calling you a liar or anything. Its just that I have found that there is "false" information out there as to how the fur is obtained. It is usually suported or put out by groups that support the fur industry. It may not appear like that out front, but some where down the road.
But you are right, I did some more checking and it is not always the case. There are some fur farms who claim they kill in humane ways. Electrocution, cervical dislocation, chopping off the head. Skinning alive is still the best to assure the animal doesn't scent itself or the more gross thing I forgot about. When an animal dies, it loses all bowel and bladder control. So...well I'll leave that part to your imagination.
You want to do your part? Its simple. You don't have to join any group of nutcases who practice domestic terrrorism (and yes, that's what it is). If you want to help, don't support retailers who sell furs. Its simeple and effective. If they lose business, they will go out of business.
:yot: Its the same with puppy mill farms, products that don't use recycled material, SUVs, just to name a few.
[ February 05, 2003, 04:41: Message edited by: Elios ]
Wed, 5th Feb '03, 10:05am
Fur is useless. That's all I have to say about it. There is an ample supply of clothes for females as it is, without those stupid hairbags. I'm not the only guy my age who I know that thinks a lady using a fur is not only snobbish, but downright old-fashioned, vain, and a difficult person to come along with. Not one I'd like to get to know better anyway.
There was a time when I thought about the animals involved in making furs, but that hardly plays a role in it anymore. It's the same as with throwing off garbage into the nature. I don't care about mother earth or anything, but I think it's a show of incredible stupidity, ignorance and lazyness to not carry that trash of your own with you until you can find a garbage can, because it is so easy to do that.
Wed, 5th Feb '03, 2:57pm
As I see this there are several very distinct questions to consider.
1 - Fur obtained from endangered species are obviously a problem. Not in terms of the wearing of fur, but the fact that we are threatening to kill off the species entirely. Similar examples are Ivory, Shark fins etc. They are all obtained for different reasons, but the issue is the same. We should clearly not be killing off species of animals knowingly if we have any sense of responsibilty for our environment.
2 - Farmed fur, or fur from animals under no threat of extinction. Well, I have no real problem with it providing the killing is performed more humanely than described so eloquently by Elios. It is really no different to farming animals for other parts including their meat, it just seems more easily justifiable to say that it serves a purpose for us to eat the meat. Well it serves a purpose to wear warm clothing in cold climates too.
Wed, 5th Feb '03, 6:15pm
Personally, I don't care for it. But, I'm not going to impose my ethics on people.
I look at it like this. I like to lay naked on a fur rug. I like to sleep naked between fur blankets. It feels naughty, and more often than not, the individual I'm with feels naughty as well. It works out for everyone but the animals we're laying on/between.
But, right this second, humans need amino acids. You can get them all synthetic; everything that you need to sustain your life can be made from raw organic molecules. But, it's cheaper (right now, in terms of time and money) to kill animals. Yes, I personally look forward to the day when it's not, but right now it is.
So, that animal has died. I believe the Indians (yes, I mean American Indians, but it's my way of respecting them to just say Indian) were correct. Use everything. If the animal died to sustain life, then use it to the utmost possible.
And, man, they did. They used sinews and ligaments. Fat and horns. Hooves and tails. Eyes and brain.
They used the fur. They slept under/between fur. They wore fur. They wrapped their babies in fur, and slung them around in the original Baby Bijournes. Yeah, it was a bit of a status symbol. But the rest of the animal was compeltely used. So, my conscience doesn't bother as much.
Yes, I know they still use the meat. They grind it up, and make Chicken McNuggets with it. Cartlige and eyes and hearts and tails. But, it's become so removed and "taken for granted", that I don't really like it.
Tell you what. If the chick (guy?) wearing the mink coat, actually ate and used the rest of the mink in their everyday life, then I wouldn't feel nearly as negative toward it.
To me, it's kind of like smoking. I don't condemn the individual because they smoke, but that does not mean I care to be around them. There's no good reason for me to be insulting or hostile or rude to them, I just don't care to spend time with them.
Kind of provides a little conflict in there, too. As my mother had a Mink coat... :mommy:
[edit: non-typist today, it would seem]
[ February 05, 2003, 18:19: Message edited by: ejsmith ]
Wed, 5th Feb '03, 8:39pm
I dont have anything against people who use furs and stuff. Really, I dont care about the animals and I think some furs are really nice.
Wed, 5th Feb '03, 10:51pm
I dont like fur, is feels so (duuuhh) dead, wow look at me people Im wearing a corpse around my neck :rolleyes: yeah really something to be proud of
Fri, 7th Feb '03, 7:05am
According to a New York Times article I read recently, Greenpeace, PETA, and a bunch of European countries have managed to put the fur industry out of business in Northern Canada. I'll bet they're self-righteously happy, having screwed the economy of a region they've never even seen. Now all of the trappers are out of work. Guess who's giving them jobs? You guessed it, oil companies!! yeah, that's right. Now, the trappers had a vested interest in making sure that they never exterminated a species, because if they did, they would be out of work. Skill testing question: do the big oil companies have a vested economic interest in keeping fur-bearing animals alive and thriving? Answer: Not a chance in h . . . my mother in law's house (a curse worse than any other :) ) Those animals are worse off now, and a LOT closer to extinction than they ever were when trapping was the major industry in the North. I hope those stupid, self-righteous, know nothing eco-fascists are happy with their short-sighted little selves. Maybe if they stuck with talking about what they know instead of sticking their noses into other peoples' lives the Arctic ecosystem they supposedly care so much about would have a fighting chance.
Fri, 7th Feb '03, 7:50am
Having worked at a zoo and aquarium. I've dealt first hand with members of groups such as PETA. The problem is they really don't give a damn about the issues. Ever notice how the only go for the stories or issues that get them media attention? While attending conferences or such, I've attended zoos where the living conditions were deplorable. I've seen those road side zoos where you are so surprised the animals are still alive. Have any of those groups protested them? No. But when Ringling Bros. Circus is in a town, you can almost gaurauntee the PETA will be there. Incidently, contrary to what people believe, major circuses like Ringling Bros, have changed drastically, improved conditions. Ringling Bros. has contributed immensly to the breeding and behavioral study of elephants, more than any zoo.
Sat, 8th Feb '03, 9:38pm
PETA is an extremist to a good cause. I even approve of their violence. The reason they go for big events and issues that will get them in the news, is that they discourage smaller groups from using cruel methods, in case they decide to go after them. Basically, you get the big guys to be "humane" (which is a gross overstatement), the little ones follow suit before they fall behind the times.
They also expose the truth to large groups of people, and therefore get more supporters.
My beliefs on fur? Hah! I don't expect anyone to agree. :D ;)
It's sickening for me to hear people say "It's okay if the fur came from here because the animals were killed in humane ways" or "Minks really aren't nice animals." That's not the point at all.
The point is, creatures are being killed. Justify it as you will. I don't really give whether your fur coat or blanket is warm, arousing, or naughty, there are alternatives. Bags and shoes don't need to be made out of snakeskin (do you eat snake meat?) or crocodile, nor do you need a shark-tooth necklace.
I don't believe it is justified to say that we should keep on supporting these industries because or else they'd release the animals and those species would die out. I don't know what the solution is, but continuing to exploit them isn't the answer IMO. Fact of the matter is, there was a huge mistake made when people started keeping birds/ferrets/squirrels/exotic animals/wildlife as pets or in a domesticated environment, breeding them, keeping them penned from birth until death by skinning. Maybe the best solution is to let them go free, wander. After all, they don't eat beef in India, yet there is a large population of cows.
No, I'm not a strict vegetarian. I would fully support eating meat if we lived in a time and place where it wasn't mass slaughter, where we ate to survive, but that isn't so, and I avoid meat whenever I can.
(I think I went a bit off topic on what I was saying in the first place, but I can't remember)