Stupid question, I know. But while I’m morally opposed to fur coats, I am starting to wonder WHY? I have no trouble justifying leather. It’s not that we kill cows just for their skin… we also eat them, and use pretty much the entire carcass.
Note that this thread is NOT to start a subject on the morality of killing animals for food. I am not looking for a GD topic.
I specifically want to know why, among people who have no problem killing animals for food, medical research, etc… why is fur considered to be politcally incorrect? Are the animals killed used for food? If so, why are they any different than cows?
Please don’t read sarcasm into this, it’s a subject I know little about, and the resources on the web tend to be from extremist points of view (PETA, anyone?). I’m looking for more centrist responses.
Most animals used for their fur (minks, chinchillas, etc) are not used for food. There is not enough meat, and what there is is often considered inedible or just not tasty enough to salvage. Minks have stink glands which probably affect the taste of the meat to some degree. The only animal that might be used for both fur and meat is the rabbit, but I don’t know if the rabbits at fur farms are actually used as meat. So therefore, animals at fur farms die only for the sake of human luxury.
Also, many more animals have to die to make a fur coat than have to die to make a leather coat. You can cut the material for two or more coats out of one cow (which is afterwards used for meat), but it often takes ten minks or more to make a fur coat. So many consider it a waste of too many lives for too little end product.
Also, the ways in which animals at fur farms are treated and executed is really horrific, much more so than the environment at slaughterhouses. They are usually electrocuted through a probe placed in the anus, which most veterinary/animal health type people say causes great pain to the animal. The killing of cows and other leather animals is merciful by comparison.
And finally, leather is practical, while fur (at least, fancy women’s fur coats) is generally not. Leather is a great insulator, and a very tough fabric. Even now, when we have fashion leather coats that provide little protection against the weather, leather still has a feeling of practicality. Fur doesn’t (except for, I guess, woolly mammoth type coats).
These are the arguments I’ve heard as to why people protest fur and not leather, or at least, not as many people protest leather. These happen to be my beliefs too; I hope I’m not straying too much into GD territory, although I have the feeling this thread will be moved there anyway.
“People who have no problem killing animals for food, medical research, etc” is a very broad group, and you are likely to get a range of responses to yoiur question, but there are two broad objections:
Fur is the crassest sort of commercialisation. You are killing animals for the sole purpose of turning their skins into a fashion accesory. The animals aren’t being raised for meat, they aren’t being killed for medicine, or shelter or any other worthwhile purpose. They are being killed because someone thinks their skins look better on them than on the animal. Even if you accept killing animals for ‘worthwhile’ reasons you may not accept killing them for something as frivolous as fashion.
Fur animals are wild animals and as a result fur is almost inevitably cruel. It’s hard to kill a wild animal humanely, and even harder to kill them humanely without damaging the fur. As a result we have animals being drowned or poisoned or baby seals being clubbed to death. It’s generally unsightly and often painful. Intensively farmed animals like foxes and minks don’t fare much better. Although they are often more humanely killed they don’t exactly live a natural life, and being such recent domesticates they haven’t been bred to tolerate life in a small cage surrounded by other animals.
I guess you could factor in a general dislike of killing wild animals as a minor subset of point 2.
In contrast leather is a by product of meat production in most cases. The animals were being slaughtered anyway and the leather would be wasted if it wasn’t converted into clothing. And of course the animals are usually long-term domesticates.
The people who object to fur usually object to exotic leather goods as well, such as crocodile or ostrich, and for much the same reasons.
Then there’s the old saw that it’s easier to protest and harass little old ladies in fur coats than to do the same to biker gangs in leather
Fur and leather can be quite durable and last decades if properly cared for. They are warm and block wind. As such, they do have a practical side in cold climates. However, I can’t condone using endangered species for clothing, or unnecessary cruelty in obtaining any fur or leather. So I’d say I’m more comfortable with domestic animal hide leather and rabbit fur than a lot of other choices.
Monty, my understanding (as a former Animal Science student) was that the whole carcass of slaughtered cattle was used. After all, one reason for the spread of Mad Cow disease was an attempt to get some utility out of CNS tissue that would otherwise have no other use. The market for leather is such that even poor quality skins have economic value.
(Which is just as well, IMNSHO, otherwise we’d have to worry about one more thing going into sausage and hotdogs.)
There’s a strong correlation IMO between the animals people want to protect and how “cute” they are. With the exception of ARA’s, not many people are bothered by the slaughter of (ugly) cows and chickens. Yet they get perturbed when “cute” animals are killed, especially “soft cuddly” ones and animals with Big Brown Eyes[sup]TM[/sup].
While cuddliness may be a factor (far more people oppose recreational hunting than fishing, yet fishing involves inflicting pain that can last for quite some time before the kill, but fish are cold and clammy), it cannot be the whole story. A lamb or a calf is far more cuddly than a mink.
I don’t know that it is possible to answer the OP in a GQ manner. There are probably many reasons and different people have different ones: cuddliness, cruelty, the fact that an animal is killed just for its skin, wealth-envy (furs are worn by the “evil rich”).
I think that you need to find some people with those beliefes. Until you do anyone answering the OP, including myself, would just be presenting straw man arguments. You might try phrasing the question differently, perhaps in IMHO as “is anyone against fur but in factor of using animals for leather and meat?”
Weoll, I think the real reason is that few people wear fur (and those are mostly either the rich or models) and many of us wear leather. The dude who protest fur can do so knowing the secretly many of the middle-class populace also don’t really like “those snooty rich bitches who wear mink coats”.
But don’t worry- the dudes who protest fur also don’t want us to wear leather either. Leather’s next, after they win the battle to get you to stop wearing fur. So is meat.
So the answer is: “most of those who actively protest fur would also protest leather, but they don’t think they can get away with it yet”. I do say most, as there are a few enviro activists that really only want us to give up wild-trapped fur. And, they have some good points in their arguments.
You’re not kidding! I’ve since lost the link, but a few years ago there was an article in Discover magazine that listed all the uses of cow parts…everything from medical products to ingredients in cosmetics. So, in terms of the OP’s question, I guess leather goods are OK as long as the entire animal is being used.
Very amusing, many years ago I saw Bob Barker leading an anti-fur march wearing a knee-length leather coat. It wasn’t commented on, but gave me a WTF moment. Even if it was a fake leather (do they have that?), way to send a mixed message.
I’m of the opinion that people love causes that give them the ethical high-ground, if only in their minds. If you are anti-fur or anti-meat, that’s great and I hope it makes you happy. Do not, however, get in my face about it. I disagree with you, and that doesn’t make either one of us a better person.
I guess my reasons for disliking fur have already been stated - so many lives lost for one coat, which is really not all that practical to wear anyway; and the fact that only the fur is used. When we used to slaughter pigs on my grandfather’s farm, he was very proud of the fact that “we used everything but the squeal.”
Huh? Fur is very practical. It’s a natural insulator, designed to cut the wind and trap the body heat. It’s very effective at that task - that’s why the farther north you go, the more heavily furred the animals get. A good muskrat hat is one of the best headgear going, when it’s -30 and the wind’s blowing. That’s why the Canadian Mounties wear them.
Now, some people may not wear fur in situations where it’s not practical - that’s a different issue entirely.
Just to say where I’m coming from, I generally but not vehemently don’t approve of fur, and I do wear leather. I have worn fur coats, though.
IME, wearing a fur coat was a non-stop experience of “Omigod don’t let something happen to this expensive thing I’m wearing for a few hours of glamour.” It was by no means a practical experience, even if it was warm. Spills, cigarettes, humidity, leaning against stuff–this all threatened permanent damage or an expensive cleaning. Wool, leather, thinsulate or down all did a much better job of combining practical and warm. But if the Mounties wear fur hats for practical reasons, I’m not particularly bent out of shape about it.
Leather seems to be an almost uniquely practical material for shoes. It breathes and adjusts to the shape of your foot in the way no synthetic ever has for me. It lasts longer than cloth, and cloth shoes are often judged not quite formal enough for dress wear. So I do wear leather shoes. I don’t, anymore, wear leather clothes like a coat or a skirt. For some people a leather jacket may serve a practical purpose, like a biker’s jacket, but for me it would just be style, and I don’t wear leather for style. You may have a group of folks who haven’t completely eliminated leather, but still don’t wear it as a fashion statement.
I don’t know who said it first, but I’ve been hearing it for 25 years. It’s been around awhile. Probably originated with a stand up comic but darn if I know.
