Fur in fashion

Post Reply New Topic

No because an animal does that they need to survive. people that imply that that is aimed at animals are being silly s and just continuing a stereotype.. lets make vegan animals..... hmmmmm.

The difference between an animal and a human is that one is more intelligent than the other. Just because it is not a human does not mean it deserves a happy life more than you and does not give you superiority over it to exploit it in a way it suffers.

The meat and dairy industry is a sad disgrace across the world.

I do believe people should be given a choice in what they want to eat, but I do prefer to try and promote ethical treatment of animals. (that was not a PETA reference). The THUS approach sounds better to me that the PETA aggressive type of approach. I might use lots of their material as to show the issues but I just ask my friends and family to support Organic Meat. Organic Dairy, Organic farming so that the insects do not die. Basically I ask them to choose the best option they can and not to consume animals which have been forced to suffer needlessly.

I am sorry for drawing out the human comparison. I feel bad about it. But it is how I feel about it. I do not think that you, me, my family, my friends, my dog, or any living creature has more right in the world over one another, which is why I personally find it senseless that we can use fur and leather.

Food I am more tolerable of because we need it to survive. Does THUS have an angle on food?

Not at all, you implied that if I feel sad that a family member was killed, then a animal would feel the same way, but that would also apply to animals too.... If a deer gets sad that it's brother was killed by a human, then is should also be sad if he was killed by a wolf. Death is death, doesn't matter who hunted the deer, wolf or human. The difference is when a human hunted it, it was instant with a gun, when a wolf hunts, it takes a while for the deer to die, and it suffers in the process.
This is why we have humane slaughter systems, more so thanks to Temple Grandin. The fact is humans eat animals and animals eat each other, but when humans eat animals, we have the ability to do it in a humane way. Nature is cruel, but we don't have to be. Animals eat other animals to survive, so do we, in some parts of the world, animals are the ONLY source of food people have.
We live in the real world, not Disney World.



I agree animals should live happy lives, but they are not all angels themselves, some delight in the torture in others, like how a cat bats around a mouse before killing it, should we be teaching hunting ethics to cats? How about those orcas that tossed around a sealion? (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ei3eibB9e6A)
Laws says that humans have to, should we be doing the same for animals?



I'd hate to tell you this, but organic farmers do indeed use pesticides.... they have to because they will get less money for less of a crop.



That is where I would draw the line, that is a philosophy of PETA, there is a difference in animal rights and animal welfare. I am on the welfare side. If animals have the sames rights, then why are they not voteing? What if they break the law? Hurt someone? Do they go to animal courts and jails? I don't seem them at rallies or protests to change a policy. Rights have responsibilities, and animals do not have the same responsibilities as people do, their societies and not like ours. When you look at the PETA campaigns, they are not pro-animal, they are anti-human, this was demonstrated when they had their 'holocaust on your plate' campaign.

Animals and people living together in perfect peace with no death is a nice pipe dream, but that is all it is, a dream, we have to make due with reality, but we can make it better, we don't have to kill a cow for food the same way a lion has to.



THSUS is very similar to PETA. They are only in favor of a vegan diet. To me vegetarian not a big deal at all... but vegan is a bit too far, unless they bring their own lunch, they are very hard to accommodate for, as my friend found out when she invited a vegan to her wedding.

If you plan on donating to a animal group, the only thing I can ask is investigate them thoroughly, just because it has a nice name and pictures of puppies and kitties doesn't mean it's all good on the inside. The larger the organization, the more room there is for corruption. Smaller ones seem to get more done.

The molt at 12-14 days. They will go into the water at that point, but are not exactly graceful swimmers. They are, indeed, still babies. Nor are they able to 'care for themselves.'
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harp_Seal, quote:
Pups are unable to swim or find food until 7–8 weeks old or until the ice melts, leaving them vulnerable to polar bears and other predators. This fast costs them up to 50% of their weight. As many as 30% of pups die during their first year, due in part to their early immobility because they learn to swim only slowly.

from the same article as before, quote:
After the European Union's ban on whitecoat pelt imports, the Canadian government and sealing industry developed markets for the pelts of beaters. In 1996, the kill rates again increased to over 200,000 each year, except in the year 2000. In 2002 and 2004 to 2006, over 300,000 seal pups were killed each year.
...according to official DFO kill reports, 97% percent of the estimated million harp seals killed in the last four years have been under three months old, and the majority of these are less than one month old.[106] [107]
Note that 'beaters' are pups that have molted (ie, older than 2 weeks) but which cannot swim well.

Of course they are not friendly; they're wild animals. How is that relevant?

good to know that they didn't go to waste.


Blood and brains spraying across the ice when the seal is whacked on the head is considered 'gore' in most places. It is, at least, clear that those seals probably died quickly and is probably more humane than some slaughterhouses (when done correctly. There have been veterinary studies of carcasses showing that significant numbers had intact skulls).


A moose calf, anyway.


"I stand corrected," means, "I acknowledge that I was wrong on that point." In other words, no further need to argue that you are taking seal oil capsules.


It may not seem so from where you are, but sealing is not the major crusade of any of those groups.


Subsistence hunting is a far, far thing from killing an animal only, or mainly for its skin. I have stated earlier on this thread that I'm ok with leather and fleece of food animals being used; my problem is when the skin is the main or only reason the animal is being raised and/or killed, and the rest of it is treated as literal crab bait (as with minks). I'm glad to learn that the seal pup carcasses are actually eaten rather than being wasted as I had previously thought, but it still appears needlessly cruel to me to kill them when they are so young. I don't eat veal, either.

to PATRICK NEVILLE.....thank you for what you write. i came to the conclusion long ago that many of the inhabitants of wrong planet care not for any living creature other than humans. non-human pain and abuse are
of no concern to them. i'm sure many of them say things just to piss you off. better to ignore these things called humans.

@ Chibi_Neko. I am sorry for the aggressive attitude of mines I just got a bit upset and agitated at this plus things away from WP as well.

This will go on forever and forver so I just want to quickly say, in nature animals will be hunted by one another and of course they grieve a lost one but humans should not be in the mix. We are animals in our own right but we are effecting what should be part of a balanced system of life and death. The amount of humans on the planet and the animals targeted for their qualities whether it is fur, leather, food or anything else is not doing us many favours.

If people need to hunt to live then that is fine. If it is from an animal which hunted with meat in mind and the fur is taken it is not a significant loss.

Breading animals for the sole purpose of stealing their skin is revolting to me. I can't understand the need to kill for the name of fashion (which is the case more often than not, I realise warmth applies to for many people too).

I care and love for animals more than I do for most human beings.

I don't want to say any more because neither of us will change our opinions.

I recommend that you not buy any fur or leather goods and certainly nothing made of tusks, teeth or animal bone.

ruveyn

Nope, still not 'babies' they are known young silvers, I think some people call the silver backs.... anyway they are easy to identify, we don't hunt those either. If big animal organizations say that we hunt young seals they probably can't tell the difference between a adult and a young, hell THSUS Still likes to wave white coat signs around. I don't know of anyone who hunts young seals and anyone who does is breaking the law.



I see a little blood, but no brains. That video is not gory compared to what I have seen. Skinning and cleaning any animal is much more gory then pulling a dead seal in a boat.



No I mean a 'moose' moose.... don't hunt calfs.

Your statements about the age of the seals being hunted conflicts with the source I cited earlier. For now, I will say that I hope you are correct but I'm still not buying any seal products.

edit: wrt. gore, there's brain in there as well. One cannot whack something that hard in the head without some greymatter (which is filled with blood vessels that shred on trauma, causing the subsequent chunks to be red) coming out along with the blood.

There's lots of *blood* when something is butchered, but none of what I would call 'gore' at all because the animal is already dead.

Thanks. I aim by best to do so.

If you live in the States, you won't be able to anyway, Seal products where banned in USA for quite a while now.

In response to concerns over the 'activism industry' some valid points have been made, however to equate the media circus that surrounds the 'public face' of various worthy 'causes' or 'shifts in conciousness' or whatever you choose to percieve them is to miss the point.
The initial topic is 'fur in fashion' and whether or not it is ethical to murder another living thing for it's skin in order to satisfy human vanity. This has been expanded into a broader argument about animal rights and welfare, but seriously how far does this expansion go? Is meat murder? An unessasary killing is to my mind a murder.

As I have already suggested there are some pertinent books and some well informed thinkers that can be refered to for guidance.

The question here is ethical, and the broader context spreads accross environmental and cultural issues, it is complex in the first instance but ultimately simple to work your way through once you have informed yourself of the issues.

Seal skins?
Ok, you are Innuit and your people have lived a harsh existence in a harsh and dynamic environment, your primary food source is fish and seal flesh, to my thinking you are under an ethical obligation to use it's skin.
Now, you are in a city in a temperate climate and the skin you will buy is a status symbol and not at all essential to your survival, it is sourced by a seasonal slaughter of infant seals while the seal communities are at their most vulnerable, it is unnessasary and brings out the worst in the humans involved it is tied to declining seal numbers and therefore threatens biodiversity, it is ultimately unnessasary and therefore surely it is unethical?

Now meat as food?
You are a nomadic person living in a wild eccosystem, you sustain yourself by respecting the eccosystem that supports you and taking only what you need, your diet consists of gathered plant matter and some meat from hunting, I personally have no problem with this, it is less offensive and ethically more sustainable than modern industrial existence.
Or, perhaps you are a semi nomadic herdsman, you don't know what a fence or a slaughterhouse is, you live symbiotically with a group from a different species, who ultimately choose to stay with you as the benefits outway the death of one from within the group [which would have happened due to other predation anyway], again I find this acceptable.
Both these examples are representative of the vast bulk of the time which we have been homo sapiens, the environmental impact was negligable and social stability enhanced by mutual dependence and an appropriate sense of place within the natural order.

Conversely modern farming in the age of strand wire and slaughterhouses has coincided with widespread deforestation, pollution of waterways and the age of concentration camps, cluster bombs, land mines and genocide.

David Suzuki, Peter Singer, George Monbiot, Peter Kropotkin and even Jared Diamond have written extensively on issues surrounding this core issue, 'fur as fashion' why? just because we can does not mean we should.

peace j

Well said!

It has become patently obvious to me that many 'contributors' to this forum don't understand the concept of discussion and really only come here to harp on against anything that dosen't conform to a narrow north american conservative world view and they are most certainly best ignored. Notice how those who are able to have real conversation adjust their perspectives as a result of dialogue and even occaisionally make appologies, lovely to see.

peace j

When it gets to the heart of the issue,
I find some people continue chanting that human animals are
by virtue of some intangible hierarchical principle
endowed with ethical rights whereas non-human animals are not,
(above, better, divinely-ordered, "obvious", natural, and other such vagaries)
and the rest keep asking why, and will continue to do so, for there's never a real justification for such a hierarchy,
just as there never was one when it was applied to women, blacks, and Jews.

Unless our working modus operandi ethically is literally

Might makes Right

or

Different, therefore lesser

Last edited by Bethie on 31 Mar 2011, 8:52 pm, edited 4 times in total.

QFT.

What does QFT mean? I googled it cause I was wondering and something tells me you are not referring to Quantum Field Theory lol

Quoted for Truth.

Dork.