Fur Dilemma – Burberry Faux Fur Revealed to be Real

  • Pin it

Why all this fascination around fur coats? Can it be reminiscence from our “savage” years? A way to show our hunting prizes without the mess of the actual hunt?

I always found myself on the other side of the barricade when natural fur involved: never understood why women (especially after a certain age) fall for those incredibly massive disgraceful, unpractical fur coats! What makes them proudly wear dead animals on their backs?

Celebrities Wearing Fur

The Humane Society of the United States warned consumers that some of the winter coats labeled as “faux fur” or accessorized with “faux fur” may actually be made of real fur. A two-year investigation resulted in pulling out Burberry parkas from Saks Fifth Avenue because they were mislabeled with “faux fur collar”, Burlington Coat Factory were pulled out from Bloomingdale’s. For more accuracy – the mislabeled “faux fur” come from China where reports state that raccoon dog fur is mostly used for this kind of products.

Madonna Fur Coat Elle MacPherson Fur Coat

Are you fascinated by fur coats? Or do you feel it’s rather “savage” and don’t want animal blood on your back?


#1 Esra Akkaya on 05.14.08 at 2:51 pm

I don’t think that women start wearing fur coats after a certain age. A lot of young women, including myself, enjoy fur coats.
Coming to your question, Catherine Deneuve answered it perfectly. Women love real fur because it is voluptuous, sumptuous, very beautiful, very warm and very soft. I think that’s why millions of women from all ages are in love with real fur garments.

#2 Dan on 06.07.08 at 5:01 pm

I’m a guy and i agree with you Esra. Real fur is gorgeous and i myself want to wear it

#3 RonG on 07.06.08 at 8:31 pm

It is said opposition to fur declines with the temperature.

That aside, fur is, and always had been a natural, tactile, alluring and — yes — warm and sensuous material. Though women may traditionally don the apparel, it is attractive to men and children alike.

#4 kpriss on 07.08.08 at 7:22 am

I can understand Esra’s point of view and agree with the fact that most women consider fur to be a very sensuous and sumptuous material.

I give in for Dan that men too are entitled to wear fur and enjoy it at least as much as women do.

But RonG, you left me all puzzled about children wearing fur…Do they really understand fur and the implications? Or it’s more about their parents’ pleasures?

#5 RonG on 07.10.08 at 6:44 am


To clarify, there is a natural innocent enjoyment of fur by children. You can see it when a child brushes against her aunt’s fur coat or holds a bunny.

However he wearing of a fur by a child is definitely influenced by a parent — for whatever reason. I agree.

#6 999 on 07.10.08 at 7:13 am

Every one has the right to choose, this must be remembered. RonG, I know what you mean. If you see a child with it’s mother wearing a fur, they will naturally snggle in. I guess this s because they just like the softness and warmth. Childrem love textures, thats why many childrens toys are made with contrasting textures-hard, soft, rough, smooth etc.

As for men enjoying wearing fur, why is it normally seen as exclusively enjoyed by women? Men look good in the right fur, and are equally able to appreciate the style, warmth and comfort that it provides.

#7 brandy on 07.10.08 at 7:47 am

fur is a natural resource..it takes more oil to make a faux fur than it does to run a car engine.. so in this world today.. should we not be looking to use more natural substances.. like fur?

just a question worth asking..!

#8 Zaphod on 07.10.08 at 8:16 am

I as a male have to agree to most things said above. I also like the soft feel a fur has and like the warmth it gives during cold wheather. I really like to use everything mother nature delivers, i.e. I like garments out of rex rabbit where the meat is alredy used – i take the fur for my garments …

#9 Mr.C on 07.10.08 at 8:28 am

Real fur is a natural REPLACEABLE resource. Fake fur is an ecological disaster with an enourmous carbon footprint. There should be no shame in wearing fur. It is only a fashion choice; and IMHO an excellent fashion choice.

#10 R. Workman on 07.10.08 at 8:49 am

It is every person’s right to decide whether it is good or bad to wear fur or any other kind clothing. I am angered, NOT because people choose to wear fur. I am angered because some people think it’s okay to infringe on others’ right to decide!

If you don’t like fur then, FINE! Don’t wear it!

People who think they have the right to tell other people what to do should go live in Iran!

#11 AlanVP on 07.10.08 at 9:32 pm

Why all this fascination around fur coats? This is asked as if fur as a fashion is something new. Excuse me, but men and women of *all* ages, *and* children have been wearing (and cuddling) fur for many, many centuries! I am really getting weary of hearing the same old talking points again and again and again espoused by so-called animal rights activists. Fur is not only practical, it is a usable, durable and replenishable natural resource that is by far superior to the faux furs not only as a fashion, but as an environmentally friendly product. I also resent the writer’s implication that if someone is “fascinated” (an interesting choice of a word) by fur, that must mean that he or she is, somehow, inherently evil. Kpriss, if you really don’t like fur, then don’t wear it. I, for one, could care less. Just please don’t be so judgemental against those of us who are more liberated in the way we choose to live our lives.

#12 OFF on 07.11.08 at 12:01 am

Your comments and premis of the so called article are specious. The comments are loaded to elicit the worst anti fur comments with false and missleading stamenents and so calles ‘facts’.

Those of us, male and female, who enjoy furs are generally not moved by any of the supposed reasons listed.

I think the responses clearly indicate very normal and civilized reasons for chosing to wear furs.

What we fur wearers do find “Uncivilised and Savage” is the premise that the anti fur individuals feel free to impinge on our rights to wear furs or anything else we please.

What I find reprehensible these days in this oil crisis are folks wearing Gortex and other petroleum based clothing. This kills more animals in the most cruel ways possible. Remember the Valdes oil spill?

#13 bobby on 07.11.08 at 6:38 am

I agree with all the previous comments and think that real fur is perfectly fine. There are such horrendous things going on in this world that i cannot see why people are so up in arms about animals being bred for their pelts. I have come to the conclusion it is because people either relate it to killing their childhood teddy-bear or because the wearing of fur is associated with the wealthy.

#14 WF on 07.11.08 at 7:53 am

You say “I always found myself on the other side of the barricade when natural fur involved”.

I am wondering why you would say this. I would really like to know your reasons. If you would not wear fur, would you use a leather purse or leather shoes for instance? They are made of animal hides too. Or would you purchase something else instead made of non bio degradable oil? Nylon, Orlon, etc?

Sometimes I think that we are just not really provided with the true facts when we make these decisions. There are so many facts on this subject out there that are 20 years old and based on “here say”.

#15 kpriss on 07.11.08 at 9:13 am

RonG (and RonG’s den thread friends) it is obvious that I don’t appreciate the violence leading to a natural fur coat. I stated so in my article and thought about it as a fashion-related issue. Especially because everyone is entitled to an opinion and expressing it should represent the perfect opportunity for a creative talk, I so did with mine.
When I asked my readers to express on which side their loyalty lies, I wasn’t anticipating talking about children(btw, children toys are made with several textures because they need to feel as many textures as possible in order to learn the difference between them, not because they “love” to touch things. As much as you’d like to justify yourself through this, children don’t love fur. They’re at the beginning of a long sensuous journey through life and everything is new and attractive to them. Touching and smelling fur is not a childhood good habit).

I don’t wear fur and I will not because it’s my choice according to my believes. Be free in your obsessions and try to be objectively coherent as others are entitled to their outfit freedom.

#16 Syrus on 07.11.08 at 2:37 pm

Kpriss, I’ve never understood this reidiculous comment “wearing dead animals on your back”. Do you ever talk about people wearing cotton clothing as “wearing grass on your back”? or maybe something made of silk as “wearing caterpillars on your back”? Or can I say I’ve never understood people wanting to go out wearing synthetic clothing, as “going out covered in crude oil”? Come on!! You know as well as anybody that “wearing dead animals” is just said for emotional effect, and has nothing to do with the cured pelt of an animal, and the skilled craftsmanship that goes into the making of a fur garment.

Oh! and I dont know what kids you know, but I’ve never known a kid who isnt instantly drawn to fur. Of course they love to touch things, but they invariably prefer to touch a furry toy in preference to other textures. set up a trial and see for yourself. Ant that love of “touch is also one of the reasons why most women love to wear fur as a fashion garment. That and the fact that it beats any other clothing hands down for warmth durability, and craftsmanship.

#17 OFF on 07.12.08 at 12:44 pm

Syrus hits some points about the hot button words used over those who chose to wear fur that I pointed out as inflamitory.

Not only personally but professionally I’m deep into conservation and environmental issues. It’s not just oil. They are amongst a large group of planet killers. Cotton and corn have gone way off course as mono-crops and very heavy users of both pesticides which not only harm the environment but are most likely harming us directly. These impact the clothing and fashion choices in a big way.

Then there are the cattle lots and dairies with their major contribution of methane into the atmosphere. Not a small issue to ignore!! Think of all those cattle, chickens deaths when you go to the market! One cattle feed lot probably kills more than the entire Fur Farming industry world wide!!

This is all a very complex situation but with real sollutions and real choices that one can make without being emotionally fanatical. We can have an effect on how this plays out by our choices. Try watching the Green Planet on Cable.

The fur farmers have not only been among the most environmentally responsible but they most likely wieigh positively on the issue with their resopnsible choices. On the environmental criminals list they are definitely on the friendly side of the register.

Just think of the non-organic cotton you wear or of course any oil products (plastics, etc.) that you wear way befre the fur wearing issue. Fur IS environmentally superior to any of these products.

The reason they are picked on is convenience and fear. The fur industry is relatively small and easy targets for nay sayers while the cattle and oil industries will send the police after the protesters in the most prejudicial way. Not to mention their lawyers and the Feds.

#18 999 on 07.12.08 at 4:54 pm

I feel that my comments re; childrens toys have been taken ot of context. Children are fascinated by texture, not through the ‘love of fur’ as implied, but because they learn by feel and touch.
I am fully for everyones right to freedom, the right to choose, which ever way this goes.
I am not against people who are against others wearing furs or anything else, purely against people who think that they have the right to stop others having that right to choose.
America and other countries in the modern world (Australia for one) pride them selves on freedom and their citizens having the right to choose.
As Ron Howard (ex Oz PM) can be quoted, the biggest attraction about coming to Australia is having the right to choose.
If you don’t like it, you have the right to leave.
End of.

#19 Kevin on 07.13.08 at 12:05 am

As a man I wear furs during the Fall, Winter and into the early Spring. Nothing beats the warmth of fur much less is there any other Winter type of clothing that is less harmful to the enviroment?? Once a coat is not wearable then you make a pillow or a blanket…….After that then once in alandfill it breaks down to an enviromentally safe substance versus something that remains in a landfill for a loooooooooong time. Also how many clothes can you buythat if they don’t fit in a year or wo can you get them made larger or smaller as needed??

#20 OFF on 07.13.08 at 10:05 am

One last word about sources.

Beware of Wolves in Sheeps cloting.

Also, most, if not all of the OTHER organizations that claim animal rights, put down more pets than your local and legitimate Humane Scociety under the guise that they are “better off dead”. Feel free to track the law suites and court cases over just this thing.

Many who wear furs have good and healthy pets they love and care for.

#21 Murat Kalkan on 07.16.08 at 9:28 am

I think the fur issue is the final destination in our modern society’s attempt to alienate itself from nature. We live in artificial environments in urban settings, with no meaningful contact with the nature. Children grow up by assuming that the meat in their Big Macs and those in supermarket packages are produced in “meat factories.” It’s all neat and clean. They never get to see a cow or sheep butchered; they never get to see the messiness of it all. People spend millions of dollars just to kill of the flies and bugs inhabiting their homes, which are probably more hygienic than Victorian era hospitals. The zealotry of the PETA guys in their anti-fur campaign is a hopeless search for perfection. It’s as if the world peace depends on me denouncing my fur coat. It turns out, life is much complicated than that.

I wear fur because I love its soft and sensuous touch. I don’t agree with the anti-fur camp, because I know that what they are trying to achieve is an illusion-a mirage that will never materialize.

#22 David Dent on 07.18.08 at 8:00 am

As a fine Artist specialising in horses and animals, and a conservation lobbyist, I have travelled extensively in Europe, and every time I came into contact with fur producing people I found the welfare on farms to be exceptional, and native people managing the wildernes well. In areas like Poland where nutira is managed for meat and fur and , they have done a far more ethically reponssible job of managing an invasive species rather than wiping it out as we did in the UK.
So I pledged myself one day to redress the balance against anti fur ignorance by developing my other interest, fashion. I am just a small designer and the collection I have made for a variety of Artistic Conceptual reasons though can be couture made to order. The tweed and furs used support the idea, if not the economic strength, to back traditional animal farmers and native hunters who protect habitat. Unlike those designers who hide the fact they use fur, I am proud of it and my links page will tell you why.

#23 david dent on 07.20.08 at 3:27 pm

btw Kpriss I can also add my professional opinion having an Honours degree in education that you are partly incorrect about the touch thing.
Children respond differently to different touch stimuli. What I realised as a former teacher was that when the young touch fur, or anything natural, their response is one of respect. This is entirely in line with primitive man. They know its of animal origin and yet do not instinctively recoil from it. I find it odd that anybody does and find such a response artifical; learned. Their response to fake fur or anyhing synthetic (for example fake leaves as opposed to real autumn leaves) is not the same. I have a dolphin skull I found on a beach and used it in schools. The response of young children was one of awe and respect, not recoil. This is only the response of urban adults alienated from nature; so alienated in fact that many seem to be now allergic to animals or recoil from fur.

I hope you have been able to look at some of my links and would be interested in your reaction. Though your opening vitriole was strong I think you are open minded enough to check the other side of the story; and take into account the evidence .
In Greek times, Diana the huntress was always reprsented as defender of animals. That may seem odd to us now; but it really isn’t. While we need animals, we protect them and especially their habitat. The anti fur stance of animal rights organisations has covered for the most apalling habitat destruction for alternative resources and it must stop. We need people in fashion to acknowledge that we should respect the animals that give us fur, and value clothing that lasts , realise it is infinitely renewable, recyclable, and reject disposable mass produced clothing made from finite resources using third world labour which again destroys habitat.
Yes, we must have excellent animal welfare: but in the case of fur, it is easy to see that in the finished produce. Stress in animals leads to fur loss. Essentially that is why fur is expensive: you are paying for the best animal welfare; unlike the £1.99 chicken who has often lost most of its feathers . I know it tastes bad because it has been badly treated; but most people unused to free range and game birds do not.

Anyway, I hope it has at least made you reconsider your perspective. I would be interested to know.

#24 david dent on 07.20.08 at 3:34 pm

Oh here is some info on the Humane Sociey of the United states you may find interesting;
and why they are forbidden entry to the World Conservation Union.
Animal rights and Conservation are polarised and only the latter can help animals in the long run; animal rights is pitted against conservation and the HSUS is an AR organsaion.

#25 Melanie N. on 08.08.08 at 7:38 pm

While everyone here seems to think how glamorous it is to wear fur, how many realize just how the animals are killed? Ranch or farm raised animals raised for fur are either gassed, poisoned or given anal electrocution. The fur taken from dogs and cats from the China fur trade and the most commonly used for fur trim or faux fur are skinned alive–I wish people would watch the videos that are posted at HSUS and PETA could watch them…they would turn your stomach to think animals are skinned alive for nothing more than people’s vanity

#26 Jeff K. on 08.15.08 at 5:19 pm

Dear Melanie,
Most claims that the animals are treated and killed cruelly by the fur industry have been proven to be fabrications. If you buy your fur coat from a reputable furrier, you will have the peace of mind to know that the animals have been treated humanely. Then, there just is no excuse to prevent people from enjoying fur, which is as natural and environmentally-friendly as it gets.

#27 willmer on 10.23.08 at 7:50 am

Fur is fantastic, I love the feel of it, I especially love to see a woman with a long fur coat on.

#28 willmer on 10.23.08 at 7:54 am

Nothing is nicer than the feel of fur and oc course the sight of it on a woman.

#29 drea on 11.19.08 at 4:42 pm

Animals on fur farms spend their entire lives confined to cramped, filthy wire cages, where they are exposed to all weather conditions. They often go without adequate shelter, clean water, veterinary care, or the ability to engage in natural behaviors like climbing, burrowing, and swimming. The intensive confinement causes many of them to go insane.

Fur farmers use the cheapest and cruelest killing methods available, including suffocation, electrocution, gassing, and poisoning. Many animals are electrocuted by having rods inserted into their rectums and 240 volts sent through their bodies. The animals convulse, shake, and often cry out before they have heart attacks and die. Crude killing methods aren’t always effective, and sometimes animals “wake up” while they are being skinned.

#30 rongav on 11.19.08 at 8:41 pm

Drea, please. Where do you base your facts? Modern day farmers, whether mink, fox or whatever subscribe to the most humane practices ever. The American Veterinary Society oversees the management of these fur farms, maintaining humane treatment throughout. This is old news.

If you don’t wish to wear a fur coat — great — don’t. But PLEASE don’t impose your will on those of us who will support the humane treatment and management of wildlife resources. The PETA agenda has imposed itself into society with such a verocity that the ordinary citizens feel that is the norm. Unforatunately for PETA, that is not the case as more tha 60% of the population privately support the wearing of fur.

But again, it’s yours and everyone else’s choice. FOR GOD’S SAKE please accept our right to choose as you have done in so many other arenas.

#31 loli on 11.20.08 at 5:47 pm

I would never wear fur!

Because, if you have ever bothered to see exactly how fur is obtained, you would never wear fur in a million years. Please keep in mind that most of the fur in the West comes from China where there are no animal welfare laws. The fur trade in China is gaining ground and there is no way it will stop if we continue to wear/buy fur.
See for yourself how dogs/cats/raccoons/foxes etc. get skinned alive for the fur trade but beware, it is very upsetting – and this is just one example of the barbarism of the fur trade.

This is reality and it’s happening as we speak! Just google ‘Chinese fur trade’ and you’ll find more than enough to feast your eyes on.
On top of this the Chinese market the fur of dogs and cats as ‘faux fur/rabbit/ other fur’ or other made-up names. They know that Westerners will never buy dog fur! Dog and cat fur is easy to dye in different colours, so many people don’t even realise that the coat they’re wearing is actually dog fur.

#32 R. Workman on 11.20.08 at 10:58 pm

It’s really easy to blame China for all the ills of Western society. Isn’t it?

They poison our food, steal our oil and gas and ruin our economy with their cheap labor. Now they’re killing all the puppies and kittens for their fur and selling it back to us!

It’s just convenient for you to blame all the world’s ills on China.

You haven’t given us one verifiable fact but you spout a lot of Anti-Chinese rhetoric.

Your argument is preposterous! And if you think about it for a second, you’ll realize it’s racist too!

#33 loli on 11.21.08 at 5:29 am

I’m not going to argue on this. I did not blame all the world’s ills on China. Not once.

But what I mentioned are all facts.
It is really happening.

And I also blamed the West for promoting fur: ‘there is no way it will stop if WE continue to wear/ buy fur’.

This fur issue is a two-way street, that I realise. The Chinese would not be skinning so many animals alive if there weren’t a market for fur in the West.

#34 loli on 11.21.08 at 5:49 am

Oh, and another thing: It is not about whether you want to wear fur or not. It is about the fact that many animals get killed inhumanely for their fur (meaning: they’re not DEAD before the process begins.)
The reason why they don’t shoot the animal in the head/slit its throat is because it would ruin the fur and therefore the pelts would fetch a much lower price. They are often clubbed to death or electrocuted for that very reason.

#35 R. Workman on 11.21.08 at 10:07 pm

Sorry, hon… You’re a Sinophobe.

I really don’t care what your opinion is regarding fur. You don’t have to like it. It is absolutely within your rights to decide.

What I object to is that you don’t THINK.

You simply repeat things that others have told you without verifying them.

Somebody showed you a picture of a dead animal carcass and grossed you out and got you all dandered up about it then started putting all sorts of junk into your head about how animals are supposedly killed. They showed you some staged videos where people were paid to kill animals on camera and you believed it.

I don’t care what the subject.
I don’t care what the outcome of your reasoning.

But you NEED to ask yourself a question: “How do I know that?”

Whenever somebody makes a case about some issue then presents you with “facts” to back up that argument, you need to ask, “How do you know that?”

Maybe those facts are true.
Maybe they are false.

But you’ll never know the truth until you make the effort to find out.

I happen to know how animals are taken for fur and leather. I have seen it done, first hand. And I have actually done it myself.

I have taken deer for meat and for leather. I live near a fur farm and I have been there and I have seen how it is done.

Let me tell you FOR FACT, what you see and hear in the videos and on the internet is PURE FICTION. I have seen how it is done. It is NOTHING like what you see in those videos.

But you take what other people tell you as fact without verifying it. You believe what others tell you, no questions asked.

And, because you fear people from China, you are more willing to believe the horror stories about so-called Chinese fur farms.

For starters, you need to read the American Veterinary Medical Society’s guidelines on animal euthanasia.

No fur farm in the US could stay in business if they didn’t follow the recommendations of the AVMS.

It’s a long read. It can be difficult in places but you really should understand what’s in that paper.

Finally, you should ask yourself one more question: “Why are people telling me those things?”

Usually, they are trying to get money out of you.

How many times do you hear things like, “There’s this BIG PROBLEM out there! But YOU can help stop it if you join our organization! Send your money now!”

Bottom line… You need to learn to be critical of what other people tell you.

You need to stop taking what other people tell you for granted without due skepticism.

Here… Start with me.
Be critical of what I have told you. Go ahead. I invite you because, in your criticism of me you will learn how to THINK and make up your own mind.

#36 sian on 11.23.08 at 8:50 am

you are all sick. watch how these animals die then tell me how loverly it is to wear.

#37 david dent on 11.23.08 at 3:48 pm

Unlike you sian…as you clearly have never seen animals on fur farms die, I have. The process takes seconds and is exactly the same as when you have a pet put down of old age: either with injection or gas ….or cervical dilocution. All are instant and painless. SO…when you see these animals die on videos, ask yourself what is going on because they are NOT fur farms: these videos have been proved to be fraudulent. And then ask yourself who is making them and why.

#38 R. Workman on 11.23.08 at 9:52 pm


You have the perfect right to your emotion. There is nobody who is telling you that you can’t have your feelings about animals. They are perfectly right for YOU.

But, just as it is right for you to feel the way you do, it is WRONG for you to try to force your beliefs on others.

You can not tell people what to do or how to feel without opening the door for others to tell YOU what to do and how to feel.

Why is it that people who claim to be so “liberal” and who claim to want “diversity” are so quick to judge others and attempt to restrict others beliefs in the name of what they think is right?

#39 martha on 11.29.08 at 10:30 pm

Fur ALWAYS looks better on its original owner [animals]… those people who wear fear fur just wear it for vanity (unthoughtful jerks)… they DISGUST ME!!!

#40 martha on 11.29.08 at 10:31 pm


#41 loli on 12.01.08 at 5:53 am

Oh, you guys are perfectly right. All those hundreds of fur videos are staged. Each and every one of them. They are, because we live in a perfect world. A pretty, peachy world where stuff like that doesn’t happen.
ALL the animals on EVERY fur farm get treated humanely.

I will not buy into the fur industry’s lies. They’ll say anything: ‘fur farming is humane’, ‘fur is green’ so that they can keep their trade alive. Why? Because they need your money! As simple as that. Money truly is the root of all evil.

#42 loli on 12.01.08 at 6:04 am

Oh, and please stop implying that I’m a Peta supporter.
I for one, think they are extremists.

#43 tony black on 12.05.08 at 4:46 pm

R Workman & David Dent, your naivity astounds me & is only surpassed by your ignorance. I have visted fur farms in the EU as part of my work for the EU trade commision, some fur farms are as you describe, but the majority cause incredible suffering to the animals. Think of it another way, just because you have visited a couple of restaurant kitchens that were nice and clean do you really believe they are all like this?!
Fur is the epitomy of man’s ugliest attribute; vanity.
And please do not use the angle that fur wearing is ‘belief’ or a right to choose, FUR CAUSES IMMENSE SUFFERING and for what? Nothing more than fashion.

#44 David Dent on 12.05.08 at 6:30 pm

your claims are compromised by emotive language which negates your argument; you have an ethical bias not suited for your alleged job. Perhaps however your testimony can shed some light on why the top animal welfare scientists commissioned by the EEC who found fur farmng to be the best welfare of any farmed animal claimed their findings were doctored for ‘political end’

For what possible reason would animal welfare scientsts commissioned by Brussels to research animal welfare on fur farms have their findings doctored and altered? They are adamant its for “political reasons”. Maybe because fur farms stand in the way of more sisniter land use. Here is their evidence published in outrage. Yes…no surprise to me they atually found furbearers better treated than any other farmed animals. Mink for example are one of the only domesticated animals weaned correctly. Read from page 6.

In the meantime you may want to reflect on why you think fur is about vanity and whether that tells us more about your ethics than any understanding or sypathy for animals.

#45 tony black on 12.06.08 at 9:57 am

David, you have incorrectly assumed I was biased before taking part in the study. I was just like you and before I began the research (I must admit it was only for 6months as a pre-grad for part of my studies). At the time I had no problems taking part, I thought, just like you, that fur farming had a part in a civilised society, but what I saw was shocking and distressing. Cage upon cage of these creatures are kept on top of one another, they faeces are removed once a week (if that), the fur farms were warned in advance that we would be visiting and I could see the rushed job they had made to make the farms appear presentable. I commend your argument and the fact you have bothered to look into fur farming whereas most fur wearers have no idea and don’t care. But it upsets me that you are proliferating a naive and untrue point of view that may well convince others to buy fur.

I believe it is you that needs to explain why fur is NOT about about vanity. This is why I am so adamant, there is no need to wear fur. It causes suffering for no need except for the wearer to feel good.

The majority of fur is produced in Asia and believe me, these animals are in hell for the whole of their lives, they are kept in tiny cages, up to 15 to one cage, the deficate on each other and one can see the fear, they want to die because they are in constant pain.

David, you sound like an intelligent man and it would be an asset to have you join the anti-fur campaign. Please do some more research and I assure you will give in to a more educated decision.

As I said, I had no problems with fur before I worked for 6 months as a junior studying them for the EU, but it opened my eyes to the horrors of fur.

Simply look at the reasons people buy fur and the suffering it causes, that’s all you need to do.

#46 David Dent on 12.07.08 at 3:50 pm

The claims you make are preposterous to anyone who knows anything about animal husbandry. YOU SIMPLY CANNOT REAR ANIMALS AND EXPECT THEM TO PRODUCE GOOD FUR BY MISTREATING THEM IT ISNT POSSIBLE.

Which means that what you have written here is either the result of delusion or malicius intent to spread false propaganda.

It is very easy to prove your claims without basis.

Furbearers are not reared in cages on top of each other. The urine would damage the fur of the animal below. Here you can see for yourself at a fur farm looks like.



I Have been to around 30 in several dfferent countries Tony and your information is frankly ridiculous and any intelligent person reading here will know it.

The EEC welfare report I gave you earlier if you read from page 6 will show you.

As far as the claim most animals are reared in china again a complete falshood. The vast majorty of fubearers are reared in the arctic sub arctic and in europe the usa and canada. Many fur garments are put together in china…but the animals are not reared there. They manufacture most clothing these days but not the materials.

Vanity. Well this has no meanng. in so far as all human clothing maybe considered vanity your comments my have some interesting validity; but why single out fur. Is all fashion vanity. Well maybe…but all animals have display in mating ritual so humans are no different. We have to attract the best partner…and a stylish fur certainly makes a woman look more attractive. I dont know why if you do not undertand the purpose of fashion why you are on a fashion site. However; saying fur is for vanity is at least some recogniton that fur is objectively attractive.

Fur is an infnitely renewable resource. Synthetics are made from eco damaging petro chemicals which cannot be repaired or recycled and end up in landfills that causes further damage as they are not biodgradable. In addition fur wool etc is warm and we cannot justify heating malls and offices in winter for people to walk around in polyester and longer. Most intelligent people now accept fur as eco friendly. We have used furbeaerers to clothe ourselves for hundreds of thousands of years and its ironic that as we rape the planet very recently for non renewable resources that we threaten mass extinctions. We must get back to using sustainable use of resources for clothing and fur is the ultimate example of that. As we have traded in fox furs for at least 40 000 years according to the archeaoligical record ; and it appears we have no shortage of fox the most widepread mammal predator. As many furbearers are eaten too…rabbit reindeer nutria beaver etc…there is no ethical difference to leather; so why waste the fur.

#47 tony black on 12.08.08 at 2:00 pm

It’s interesting David that your 2 links are fur manufactures isn’t it. A very balanced opinion they must have. You obviously have an ulterior motive, do you cash in on fur?

You talk about propaganda which makes me laugh, the fur industry is funded by huge multi-national fashion houses that are desperate to keep a hold of this lucrative business. The fur trade is ugly and horrofic, you fail to mention Killing procedures differ both between and within species. Common fur-farm slaughter methods include electrocution, where electrodes are clamped in the animal’s mouth and inserted into the rectum, neck snapping, gassing, and lethal injection – all methods that keep the precious pelts intact.

How ignorant do you think people are? Do you really believe they will be taken in by your half-baked arguments for fur.

You equate the fur industry to leather. Fur is produced soley for fashion and the animals killed soley for their fur.

You entire argument rests on the fact that people wear fur to ‘attracr a mate’. You’re really scraping the barrel here aren’t you David’

You also believe that the fur industry would cause damage to the enviroment if stopped. This is such a poor statment that I barely feel the need to answer it! The majority of fur is worn as a fashion ACCESSORY. If fur was made illegal it would be replaced by other clothes, and from your statement you believe that clothes damage the enviroment! You’ve really worked yourself into a corner David.

Worst of all, you are peddling propaganda, you are trying to convince others that it is ok to buy fur, you are mis-informed, ill-educated, arrogant and evavsive of the facts.

Let me give you some FACTS about:

* Due to the ethical and moral reasons and based on animal welfare concerns, fur farming was banned in the UK from 2001.
* In the EU, fur farming is banned in the UK, Netherlands (foxes only), Austria and Lander in Germany.
* The world-wide fur industry killed more than 55 million animals in 2005 for their fur.

If fur farming is such a wonderful industry why was it debated in one of the world’s most respective parliments and subsequently banned. You have no argument against this because the debate consisted of factual information not the pathetic nonsense you are regurgetating.

David your arguments are deeply floored and have no basis, they are created by fur farmers who are making money hand over fist. I didn’t want to come down on you as hard as this because I believe anyone that knows the truth will make the decision not to wear fur, but you are a closed-minded individual.

#48 Tracey on 01.03.09 at 2:01 pm

It IS NOT about wearing FUR!!!!

How IGNORANT can one be…… ??

Its the fact that over HALF of FUR comes from CHINA. If you can still wear fur after watching this video…. Then you are PURE EVIL!!! At least fight for the right for animals to be killed in a decent, pain free way as possible…. NOT BUTCHERED and TORTURED!!!! How would you like your SKIN REMOVED, down to the bare MUSCLE and BONE…. ALIVE with no PAIN relief!!!! yet again rich folk (not ALL) are pompous and ignorant!!!

So would it be ok to have that done to your Horse, Dog or Cat….??? Coz the Chinese use domestic animals that have strayed too… But oh no….. That’s different!!!

Why and HOW????

They are all animals which FEEL PAIN!!!

Have a Heart!!!!

Is FUR that gorgeous to TORTURE for???

Watch this if you can?? It is very BRUTAL….


#49 Kay on 03.05.09 at 4:40 pm

Wow, the writer of this article isn’t biased at all, are they?

#50 Fat Caveman on 03.06.09 at 3:27 am

Perhaps so, but you either stand for something or you fall for anything.

#51 jenn on 03.16.09 at 2:50 pm

I am not on anyone’s side, but I watched the video on PETA website, not knowing what was going on. Never been to that website before. I was HORRIFIED!!! People who are fine with wearing fur are disgusting!! My stomach flipped and I couldn’t even watch the whole video of them torturing those small animals. AWWW!! Come on women, quit being so self-centered and wanting something, that doesn’t belong to you in the first place. Selfish!!!

#52 David Dent on 03.17.09 at 11:31 am

perhaps you should read this JENN and question the validity of the videos you see posted on such sites. fur farms are nothing like that take my word for it I have been to many in many different countries and the welfare is superb. Far better than farmed for meat animals on the whole. MANY OF THESE VIDEOS ARE PROVEN TO BE FAKED…

#53 Tony Black on 03.17.09 at 9:25 pm

Jenn, do not listen to the ramblings of David Dent, he has a biased view, based on the fact that he sells fur. The furcommission website he links is owned and run by fur farmers.
All you need know is that fur farming was debated in the UK parliment and subsequently BANNED in 2001 due to concerns for animal welfare. This decision affected many peoples jobs and was not taken lightly. David Dent has no argument to this fact, he just peddles the same biased rubbish he finds on websites funded by the powerful fur companies.

#54 David Dent on 03.18.09 at 1:21 pm

Yes all the materials I use in my designs are based on infinitely sustainable resources: wool, tweed, leather, fur. Petro chemical clothing and cotton are non sustainable. The sooner people realise this and reject your outdated views Tony the better.
here are some of the people i buy fur from . I sold recently the coat I made from such pelts as these the cree indians supplied me with. As you can see they also eat beaver so how is it ethically different from leather?
Saskathewan is a forested wilderness and remains that way because of fur trade and hunting/fishing tourism.

The rabbit I use is also eaten.
aLL THE ANIMALS HAVE TO BE WELL TREATED OR THEY WOULD LOSE FUR THROUGH STRESS. They are not skinned alive either…co2 or lethal injectioon or cervical dislocation is used and all are instant and painless.

I also use nutria from polish managed wetlands and farms and also some from south american natives. In all these cases the practice protects and sustains the habitat for many animals; and again contrast this with the alternatives of synthetic clothing with its huge eco damage.
Next year I will be using reindeer hide from the Sami. one of my fashion models who is currently doing a phd has also spent time with these people and seen how their way of life sustains vast herds of reindeer and untouched habitat. the surest way to destroy scenes like this and the habitat that goes with it is to ban or reject fur produce.
I would have nothing to do with any practice that involved cruelty to animals; and the only reason this myth is sutained is through the politics of envy. That is why the labour party banned fur farms.

The furcommission site I linked you to would not be able to list such specific examples of fraudulently produced videos if they were not true…they would be sued.

Also…I am a fashion designer. I am here principally to read fashion entries. The anti fur people here have little or no interest in fashion. THEY ARE PROPAGANDISTS NOT I.
I only sell about 10 to 12 furs a year. There is far far more money in conning people out of money on the animal rights scam.

#55 Philippa on 03.21.09 at 4:54 am

I adore a real fur jacket. End of.

#56 Tony Black on 03.23.09 at 9:28 pm

Ah, Philippa, how wonderful life must be for the simple-minded, such a shame you’re wasting 3 million years of evolution.
And David, please read your posts to some friends, because you are rambling: “animals have to be well treated or they would lose their fur through stress”
A 10 yr old could tell you that’s nonesense.
“fur farms were banned because of the politics of envy”
Grow up David, at least use some substance for your argument, was it the same politics of envy that banned fur farming in Austria?

#57 David Dent on 03.24.09 at 12:56 pm

What difference does it make to an animal if it is killed for meat or fur? It is not logical. In terms of energy, meat gives a couple of days of energy while fur conserves energy for fifty years or more.
THE DIFFERENCE is purely that fur costs a lot of money while a meat bearers life CAN be cheap.
So yes it is always envy.

You clearly know little about animal husbandry: to keep an animal in tip top condition requires professional care. The first sign of an unhealthy or unhappy animal is in its coat condition.
YOU have suggested you have seen fur farms but evidently you have not: the animals cannot be kept on top of each other urine also damages fur. I have visited farms many times.
People will judge who tells the truth and I am known for my views on conservation and love of animals.

What is clear here by your judgemental view of philippa is that you believe you are superior intellectually and morally to those who choose to wear fur. Sadly, so did Austrian Mr H.
“whenever animal activists argue today that giving rights to animals will produce a kinder, gentler society, it is perfectly appropriate to point out that the only modern civilization to officially embrace a philosophy of animal rights did not turn out to be more kind or more gentle” (Martin Hursley)

#58 So you're an animal lover? I bet you are. on 03.25.09 at 11:19 am

David Dent. You and R. Workman should be a team.
You are carrying on like someone who is personally being attacked. You are figthing tooth and ‘claw’ to convince everyone that fur is OK. But that’s because you’re clearly biased. You are biased because you are making money from the fur industry. If you weren’t, why are you so dead-set against anyone who dares to contradict you? Why so damn passionate? Don’t lie and say that you don’t make money from it.
Every supposed ‘fact’ you proffer is verbatim from the fur commission website. Of course the fur commission is going to try and cover up the cruelty and invent lies so that they can get the fashion sheep to keep buying fur. The more fashion sheep, the more profit for them! Yay!
I have done my research. I have researched both sides and it is laughable the excuses they come up with to pull the ‘fur’ over the public’s eyes.
That article ‘Saving society from animal snuff films’ is ridiculous and even more mind-boggling is that people believe it!
I, on the other hand, have nothing to lose by exposing the horror of the fur trade. I am not making money from it. I do it because I am passionate about animals and want to see this trade end. I will do my bit to spread awareness on this issue, and nothing you do or say will stop me. Go ahead and hang onto your beliefs and hope and pray that the pro-fur public who buy your fur products do the same.
Because it’s not looking good. More and more people are becoming aware of where their fur is coming from. I’m sure the current recession isn’t helping matters either.
Perhaps you could make money from something else? There are other ways to make money beside exploiting animals, you know. Oops, I forgot – how naive of me – you’re an animal lover, so that’s unlikely to happen. So keep on whistlin’ and exploitin’ them animals merrily, David!
And thanks Tony Black for speaking your mind.

#59 chicgirl on 03.31.09 at 3:07 am

i just love my new mink coat, my first fur:)

#60 FURISMURDER on 06.09.09 at 5:39 am

I can only assume that the majority or all of you people are American because your comments are typical in that you see yourselves as better than everybody and everything else! Once you have bought your lovely mink how would you feel when parading down your street, you are grabbed and your lovely fur ripped off your back…angry? upset?? You talk of choice please enlighten me as to why you think you have the choice to decide if you wear fur but you allow the animal no choice! Better still imagine that someone decides they want your skin for a coat.. would you give it willingly..I didn’t think so… oh and please don’t give me the usual rubbish about food chains and evolution etc if you are so intelligent think about why you are wearing the fur. Not one of you have said it’s because you need it due to freezing winters, you hunted it yourself used the meat and want to use every last part of the animal that gave it’s life so you could survive no every last comment is about vanity as I said typical USA! No doubt the usual comments will come form this about animal rights activist etc etc blah blah blah
Maybe if we could all just see past image and greed world would be a better place

#61 Michelle on 08.01.09 at 1:28 pm

“David Dent. You and R. Workman should be a team.
You are carrying on like someone who is personally being attacked. You are figthing tooth and ‘claw’ to convince everyone that fur is OK. But that’s because you’re clearly biased. You are biased because you are making money from the fur industry. If you weren’t, why are you so dead-set against anyone who dares to contradict you? Why so damn passionate? Don’t lie and say that you don’t make money from it.”

They’re probably passionate about it because there are so many stupid people out there that believe in PETA/Animal Rights propaganda.

I do not wear fur. I am not involved in the fur industry at all. I think its fine for people to wear; no different from leather.

Do you eat meat? If someone told you eating meat was wrong and anyone who ate it was a murderer, By your logic, if you defend yourself, it must be because you are profiting from the meat industry or because you are biased.

Also, if you filmed someone skinning an animal alive at a place of business, would you refuse to name the employee or company? Why be so secretive about cruelty? Wouldn’t you at least name them anonymously?

If you want to prove how bad all fur farms are, why not go to one in the U.S.? Why not ask for a tour?

And even if that is how they do thing in China, that doesn’t mean that is how they do it here. By that logic, all clothing manufacturers run child sweatshops and anyone who buys clothes at the store supports child labor.

“You talk of choice please enlighten me as to why you think you have the choice to decide if you wear fur but you allow the animal no choice!”

So you don’t eat meat or wear leather? You don’t live in a house made of wood?

No one gave the animals the “choice” to be killed for meat/leather or to have their homes (trees) cut down to build yours. Nor did anyone ask for permission before bulldozing over the land to build your house on.

#62 R. Workman on 08.01.09 at 8:20 pm

One can not win a debate by narrowly defining the terms of discussion.

Basically, the only plank that anti-fur activists have in their platform is that animals die.

Others have made many arguments to the counter but, somehow, the anti-furs keep pulling it back to the same old thing. “Oh! Look at the cute, furry animals! Isn’t it so sad that they die?”

It’s such a specious argument because, as Michelle says, animals die every day for many other reasons. Nobody cries for them.

Some animals even eat other animals, devouring them alive, while they kick and squirm and bleed in a much more gruesome manner than in any abattoir.

Some folks say that it’s okay for animals to kill other animals that is a flawed argument in itself. If life is precious, so precious that no person or animal should be killed then animals that kill other animals are just as guilty as a person who kills and eats a cow or a person who kills a mink and uses its pelt for fur coats.

If you say that all life is precious then ALL life is precious, not just the life that is convenient for you to think about.

The “Fur is bad because it kills animals” argument is specious on those grounds.

And, since the anti-fur people have no other argument, then they have not argument at all. They simply have an emotional plea.

An emotional plea is a valid argument in a debate but it must be secondary to a logical argument. It can only “back up” another argument. It can not stand alone.

The reason I stand for this is not because I have an interest in the fur trade. I do not.
I make a stand is because I can not allow some thing to be arbitrarily banned because of somebody’s emotional plea.

For, if this is allowed, who is to say that somebody else will come along and make some other argument to have something else banned. Then another thing and another thing, ad infinitum.

If it is allowed to continue, someday another group will come along, wanting to ban something that YOU are interested in.

The banning of things should be limited to REAL dangers like toxic chemicals and dangerous illicit drugs, not social issues.

#63 Loli on 08.02.09 at 9:25 am

Whatever. Keep dragging your knuckles, that’s all I have to say to your comment.

#64 R. Workman on 08.02.09 at 9:37 am

Thank you.

#65 Loli on 08.02.09 at 9:38 am

My pleasure!

#66 Tony Black on 08.02.09 at 8:33 pm

Wow, this fur debate really gets people angry, and so it should. Animal rights is something most people here throw scorn on, until of course, it comes down to their own dog, hypocrisy still rules

#67 Tony Black on 08.02.09 at 8:47 pm

Let’s look at simple facts:
Fur has no use (unless you’re an Inuit), it is used by humans to massage their own egos.
Fur farming causes intolerable suffering to it’s victims.
Far farming was discussed in one the worlds greatest debating houses (UK parliment) and subsequently banned in 2001.

These are simple facts, and to be honest it becomes tedious to listen to the same pro-fur arguments time and time again. Wether you like it or not the animal rights movement is no longer restricted to hippies and utopiaists, it is becoming a mass movement, and if you’ve ever felt sadness or anger regarding animal suffering you are also part of it.

#68 Loli on 08.02.09 at 8:53 pm

Well said, Tony. The thing that gets me about fur is that it’s utterly unnecessary. Millions of animals die needlessly just so that fashion slaves can look ‘glamourous.’

#69 R. Workman on 08.02.09 at 9:28 pm

Yes! Look at the poor, cute animals! Doesn’t it make you sad?
Boo! Hoo!

Come on, don’t you have anything else?

#70 Loli on 08.03.09 at 5:49 am

Don’t you have anything else, R. Workman?

#71 R. Workman on 08.03.09 at 2:39 pm

Yes, I have plenty.

On July 10 last year I joined this discussion to say that the individual has the right to decide whether they like fur or not.

On Nov. 11 you joined the discussion whined about how animals are killed for fur. You also spouted some stuff about China.

On the 21st of Nov. I refuted your Sinophobic claims and I gave you information about the American Veterinary Medical Society’s recommendations for animal Euthanasia. You ignored it. You never read any of the information it but you still continued to whine.

On that day I told you to be critical of the things you read about the fur campain… For and agains! I gave you a lot of things to think about and suggested that you judge based on facts instead of hearsay.

Again, you continue to ignore it but still harp on the same tune: “Animals die for fur.”

Yes! Animals DO die to make fur!

I brought up the dangers of arbitrarily banning things based on popular opinion versus actual harm.

Again! You continued to harp!
“Animals die for fur!”

Already stipulated!

I tried to tell you that you can not debate with only one plank in your platform yet you made some comment about “knuckle dragging” swiftly followed by more harping.

Don’t you get it?

Do you want to spend the rest of your life as a shrieking harpie? Or, would you prefer to learn something?

Maybe, if you paid attention to the arguments and information being presented to you instead of running off at the mouth you might be able to STRENGTHEN your argument!

I hope you do!

I am not here to promote fur. Nor am I here to condemn it.
I am here to help people learn to THINK. That was my stated goal, almost from the beginning.

Now, what are you going to do?
Will you continue to thrash about in the rhetorical muck or will you learn to think and speak for yourself instead of parroting what others feed you like tepid oatmeal on a spoon?

#72 Loli on 08.03.09 at 8:13 pm

I’ll prefer to remain stupid and choke on tepid oatmeal on a spoon.

#73 R. Workman on 08.03.09 at 8:29 pm

I suppose that’s a fine way to live if all you ever aspire to is to find a rich husband and make babies for the rest of your life.

I can assure you, however, as a an oatmeal-puking, shrieking harpy, one will be unilkely to rise above the level of trailer trash, let alone catch a husband wealthy enough to support you and your children.

#74 Loli on 08.04.09 at 5:41 am

Assumption is the mother of all f*k ups. Where do you get your information from?

What makes you think that I want to catch a rich husband and make babies?

Although I’m in a relationship, I don’t believe in marriage, and regarding children, well who knows. Maybe this earth is overpopulated as it is, so I’ll have to think carefully about having children. The world doesn’t need 10 more of my ‘trailer trash’ spawn.

I don’t need children to make my life whole. Having children is a selfish act, if you think about it.

In any case, I’m deviating from the subject at hand, which is that ‘all the poor cute, fluffy animals are dying for their fur.’

#75 Darla Peroni on 09.07.09 at 8:14 pm

You can debate the ethics of fur forever, but you should all admit that fur is the most glamorous fabric to embrace a lady.

Fur is beautiful!

#76 Alpi on 09.17.09 at 6:23 am

Don’t feed the trolls!

#77 David Worzecky on 09.30.09 at 3:56 pm

I haven’t seen a discussion so full of hypocrisy. Come on girls! Taking all moral considerations aside, no one can deny that real fur *looks* beautiful, and *feels* so soft and sensuous to your touch. Whatever your conscience dictates, if you put on a fur coat, you just feel great.

I find the situation in the fur discussion similar to the one on smoking, drugs, alcohol or adultery. You may discuss the health hazards of smoking for days, but to a smoker, it is all a puff in the air because smoking a cigarette *feels* good. Same goes for drugs or alcohol. They are addictive. Adultery may be wrong and evil, but this still does not prevent millions of husbands and wives to cheat on their spouses.

The anti-fur people are slamming their heads against the wall by trying to argue against the basic fact of fashion: fur is beautiful. If it was not, furry animals would not have evolved over millions of years that way.

Now, for me, there is nothing morally wrong in raising and then killing scores of animals for their fur. If you do not agree, then fine. I feel sorry for you for depriving yourself such a wonderful indulgence. You may feel sorry for my cruelty, or you may be angry with me. We both go our own separate ways.

#78 Melanie on 09.30.09 at 4:14 pm

To quote you David:

“Taking all moral considerations aside, no one can deny that real fur *looks* beautiful, and *feels* so soft and sensuous to your touch. Whatever your conscience dictates, if you put on a fur coat, you just feel great”

Sorry David, I have no desire to ever put a fur coat on me I DON’T think it’s beautiful and I certainly wouldn’t feel great wearing fur knowing those animals were killed to feed sick vanity–besides did you know a lot of the fur is actually from cats and dogs skinned alive in the Chinese fur trade? It’s NOT mink, chinchilla or fox, etc..but cat and dog fur. Would you like to wear the fur of a pet of yours?

#79 R. Workman on 09.30.09 at 9:58 pm


Three points:

1) The supposed “fact” about Chinese fur producers skinning animals alive has been refuted already.

2) Chinese fur producers do not use “cats” and “dogs” for fur. They use an animal called a “raccoon dog.” This animal, also called “tanuki,” bares no more relation to a dog than a “ground hog” does to a a pig.
Again, an already established fact.

3) If you don’t like fur that is your right. Nobody is telling you to buy fur if you don’t like it.

If you had read the preceding posts above yours you would have known most of this. It’s obvious that you didn’t or else you wouldn’t have spouted such hearsay and other nonsense.

You’ve got to realize that, as heinous as you think fur is, you have NO RIGHT to prevent others from their beliefs. If you do, you open the door for other people to dictate their arbitrary beliefs to you. You dictate your beliefs to others. Soon others are dictating to you. That is not right.

I like beer but I drink responsibly. I don’t drive after drinking. I don’t drink on the job. Nobody gets hurt.

Something else. I don’t care for homosexual people who flaunt it in public. But, as much as I don’t like gay people, you will *NEVER* telling people that they can’t have same-sex relations with another consenting adult. NEVER!

Why do I draw this line? Simple! Because if I go around telling people that they can’t be gay if they want to, that opens the door to other people turning on me and saying that I can’t drink beer.

It’s just that simple.

You, Melanie, spreading unfounded hearsay is the same thing as trying to stop people from wearing fur if they want to.

You open up a dangerous can of worms. You have to be careful!

#80 Melanie on 09.30.09 at 10:16 pm

R Workman…but the Chinese fur trade DOES skin CATS and DOES use dog fur and NOT just the raccoon dog either…ever see the myriad of videos at YouTube of Chinese markets also boiling cats in deep vats. Many oriental cultures also think eating cats as an aphrodisiac
As far as fur in general there are so many other fabrics one can use… YES I can see if one is living in extremes of cold weather and perhaps fur is needed as clothing such as the Inuit Native Americans…but for some woman wearing a full floor lengh mink coat at the opera in NYC in May just to show off her vanity is downright stupid

As for opening can of worms…hell I do that ALL the time–I’m used to it

#81 R. Workman on 09.30.09 at 10:26 pm

Yes, yes, I have seen them all. They are all so sad. Boo, hoo!

Then you hear the translation of the people speaking in Chinese in the background: “Do you want me to do it now?” says the man on camera. A voice off-camera says, “Yes, now!”

Those videos are staged. They have been proven so.

You fear Chinese people so it is easy for you to blame all the world’s ills on China. The way you make it sound, there are millions of Chinese people with pots full of boiling cats and dogs!

Join “Loli” in the Sinophobes Club.

If you had read any of the messages above you would already know what’s been talked about and you wouldn’t be rehashing old ideas. But I’ve already told you this. This is the second time.

It’s pretty clear that you’re not interested in discussion. It’s pretty clear that all you want to do is spread hearsay and force your opinion on everybody else.

#82 Melanie on 09.30.09 at 11:13 pm

Despite what you think I HAVE been following this discussion for quite awhile a*e–I just didn’t care to chime in again with d*gs like you and David Dent around.

Fear Chinese??? Where the f*k do you get that idea?…what a laugh—but the Chinese certainly don’t have a great score card…
1. exporting wheat gluten that was contaminated and was processed in Menu food pet foods, creating the largest pet food recall and causing the deaths of thousands of pets.
2. Exporting lead painted children’s toys to USA
3. The existence of Melamine in baby formula from China
4. lack of human rights for its own people–a government that doesn’t give a shit about its own people
5. lack of humane rights for animals and no regulations for animal welfare
Probably forgetting some points as its late but no China does NOT have a great scorecard

To quote you: “It’s pretty clear that all you want to do is spread hearsay and force your opinion on everybody else.” Uh excuse me…aren’t you doing the same thing tootsie?

As for the chinese eating cats….I happen to live in a very heavy populated Chinese neighborhood darling where it used to be Irish, German and Italian ….since the influx of oriental people here one never see a stray cat or dog anymore…And when we (that is my mother and I) were threatened with eviction back in 2001 due to my mother’s hoarder instincts we managed to adopt out a lot of the extra cats, BUT we got three phone calls from three separate Chinese restaurants promising us to make us rich if we gave them our cats…..its NOT always chicken in one’s chicken chow mein

#83 Melanie on 10.01.09 at 12:05 am

LOL–looks like my full post and opinions toward you R. Workman were deleted…too bad..you missed a treat

#84 Elaine G on 10.01.09 at 5:21 am

Please do not try to bother Melanie with facts. It is clear she has an agenda of emotive propaganda and hate; something typical of the anti fur stance.
Hard for anyone to be taken seriously when spouting with venom that there is any kind of genuine love for animals is in their heart.

When she spouts that it is okay for the Inuit to wear fur but that it isn’t acceptable for a woman in NYC to wear fur to the opera she conveniently ignores that indigenous peoples in Canada and Siberia as well as small rural communities in Finland Russia Canada and even the US receive income from the sale of such fur and thus are able to practice a sustainable trade which prevents other damaging economic development. They need to trade fur not just wear it.

Where there is hunting and fur production there is forest and wilderness. Wherever there are people who are alienated from this insidious ideologies such as animal rights appear; yet it is the urban way of life of the latter that have destroyed habitat on an unprecedented scale.

I fully support fur; and thanks to Mr workman and Mr Dent for putting forward some very good arguments in the face of irrational abuse.
A fur is now on my shopping list; I nearly bought one when in Finland last year but now I definitely will.

#85 R. Workman on 10.01.09 at 7:09 am


Rwanda, Kosovo, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Liberia, Ivory Coast, Siera Leone, Somalia, Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, North Korea, Columbia, Argentina.

There is a list of 16 other countries that have FAR WORSE human rights abuse than China. If I wanted to spend all day typing I could list you, probably 100 more. I won’t spend a lot of time explaining the problems in these countries because you won’t read them anyway.

As far as industrial and trade abuses, you don’t have to go outside the U.S. borders to find anything as bad or worse than what comes out of China.

Just go watch the movie “Food, Inc.” You’ll be sick to your stomach by the time you finish watching it!

You spread hate and fear of China and Chinese people simply to justify your own narow-minded agenda. That’s called “racism.” (AKA: “Sinophobia”.)

It is very clear that you are not interested in factual debate. All you want to do is shoot off your mouth.

Go sit with “Loli.” You’ve both been sidelined.

#86 Melanie on 10.01.09 at 5:14 pm

To Elaine G
To quote you: “Hard for anyone to be taken seriously when spouting with venom that there is any kind of genuine love for animals is in their heart.”
What a crock! You obviously don’t know me very well as you wouldn’t say such an oxymoron of an opinion. I probably have MORE caring, compassion, love and concern over animals than I do people. Animals don’t do mind games, animals who are our companions and considered family members give unconditional love which is something sadly lacking in the human species.

As a general reply. What right do we as humans have to kill animals JUST for their fur? Yes we kill animals for food, but to my mind that is something different. But JUST for fur? Like what happens to the carcasses of the dead animals killed just for food? When did you ever hear of mink steaks, or chinchilla burgers? Maybe it’s due to my being part Native American myself, but our peoples when we killed animals, we not only killed for food, but utilized every part of the animal …such as the hides for shelter, clothing, etc…we didn’t kill just for fur

Also I can’t help think that it is the mind set of those raised in the Judeo-Christian religions where the bible says in Genesis that God gave dominion over everything on the earth….from the “environment” to animals–so in other words just because the bible mentions man has dominion over everything on earth that we should inflict pain to those of lesser species such as animals and in effect gives the right to kill animals in any way we choose and for whatever purposes such as killing animals just for their fur. And no, I’m not Christian, or Jewish or Muslim….I’m Pagan/Wiccan…a path of life that has respect for all things and life

As far as being called a racist? That’s the funniest most amusing of all… I have four races of blood in me via my ancestors and yes, including…drumroll please…oriental–so how can I be racist when I have Oriental blood in me as well and when I’m stating an opinion of how cruel the Chinese govt is to their own people?

#87 R. Workman on 10.01.09 at 10:30 pm

I don’t know what your religion has to do with this unless you are throwing a “red herring” into the ring. (i.e. You have nothing else to argue so you bring up something to lead us off the path.)

Just because you claim to be a whopping 25 percent “Oriental” does not preclude you from being Sinophobic.

You’re also pretty easy to manipulate. With only a few carefully chosen words, I can make you dance like a puppet on strings.

Why don’t you just argue the point? Oops! My bad! You haven’t got a point! All you can do is spout intolerance and fear.

Not very Wiccan of you, is it?

#88 Melanie on 10.01.09 at 11:19 pm

You seem to miss MY points that I’ve been making and giving my opinions about…I threw in the fact of my religion as it is also tied with my Native American beliefs to have respect for all of creation

As Bush would have said…read my lips…and I’ll requote what I’ve said:

1). What right do we as humans have to kill animals JUST for their fur? Yes we kill animals for food, but to my mind that is something different. But JUST for fur? Like what happens to the carcasses of the dead animals killed just for food? When did you ever hear of mink steaks, or chinchilla burgers? Maybe it’s due to my being part Native American myself, but our peoples when we killed animals, we not only killed for food, but utilized every part of the animal …such as the hides for shelter, clothing, etc…we didn’t kill just for fur

2).Also I can’t help think that it is the mind set of those raised in the Judeo-Christian religions where the bible says in Genesis that God gave dominion over everything on the earth….from the “environment” to animals–so in other words just because the bible mentions man has dominion over everything on earth that we should inflict pain to those of lesser species such as animals and in effect gives the right to kill animals in any way we choose and for whatever purposes such as killing animals just for their fur.

ARE YOU reading and understanding what I’m saying? What right do we have to kill animals JUST for their fur? To fulfill the vanity of someone just to be glamourous in society and show off financial wealth since that is basically what it is

To quote you: “All you can do is spout intolerance and fear.”
Aren’t you guilty of intolerance? You’re just like the religious fanatical people I know at a discussion forum I belong to who believe that only THEY will go to heaven since the follow the “true” religion…and only through the salvation of Christ will go to heaven those who don’t believe with go to the fiery pits of purgatory…gee, I guess an awful lot of people are going to hell then…so that means other Christians, Jews, Buddhists, Hindus, Muslims, Wiccans, etc—so bottom line to equate YOUR own intolerance.. only YOUR beliefs about this issue of fur are valid and right and the rest of us are wrong.

And where am I spouting fear?
And nope no one manipulates me–NOT now anyway since I put behind me an abusive background—no one can make me dance like a puppet on a string anymore…if they try I’ll kick azz —oh–ta ta——this is my last post as I do have more important things to do…like have a life

zai jian
Au Revoir
auf wiedersehen
Slán go fóill


#89 Elaine G on 10.02.09 at 4:25 am

You are aggressive. This is clear to all.
Because you feel strongly about something does not entitle you to be abusive to others.
You are incapable of rational discussion; and aggression is not something one associates with compassion.

A few points as unlike you I have checked out what Mr Dent and Mr Workman are saying as well as researching your questions re meat from fur animals.

Firstly your contempt for other human beings is clear. The position you hold that you have superior morality to the rest of us is as Mr Workman implies racist and culturally prejudiced; and generally hate towards other humans is generally not a good ethical position from which to lecture others on morality.

Secondly you accept it is okay to kill animals for food but not clothing. Does this make a difference to the animal?
It is in fact not necessary for humans to eat animals. Of course, if we all ate rice wheat and soya instead we would have to destroy vast areas of forest and natural habitat; often not sutainably (Mega rice; Argentine soya etc) so you understand it is better to at least partly rely on animals for food for the long term benefit of many animals. The same thing should apply in terms of using resources for other factors such as shelter and clothing. As you rightly point out using everything is good.
What do you think happens to the meat when humans use rabbit nutria and reindeer fur? What do you think happens to the bones? Of course everything is used. In fact the only reason mink and fox are not used is beacuse they are often culled humanely which renders meat unsuitable; though the bones are used in pet feed.
When we use alternatives such as petro chemical and cotton for clothing, we have a catastrophic ecological effect. Google the Aral sea. We have only been doing this a few years compared to the centuries people have been wearing fox and mink sustainably.

May I assure you also farmed chinchilla is often consumed and readily available in South America as a delicacy; and has been since prior to the Aztecs.
Unfortunately habitat change for produce such as coffee has made wild chinchilla endangered.
Likewise beaver mink and fox are eaten by indigenous peoples and hunters.

For the sake of the planet we have to go back to using the resources we have traditionally.
The humane alternatives are not very humane after all.

#90 Elaine G on 10.02.09 at 4:34 am

Furthermore, your claim to be pagan or wiccan is not consitent with the core beliefs of either the original religion or other similar maifestations of the circle of life belief as practised by indigenous peoples.
Such people never have contempt for fur and believe the wearer takes on the spirit of the animal. They also have great pride in how they craft the pelts and decorate them into beautiful items of clothing. They don’t merely wear fur to keep warm this is an insult to indigenous peoples. You may want to learn something about such people before you hi jack their religions.

#91 Elaine G on 10.02.09 at 4:44 am


If you respect American Indian beliefs perhaps you’d like their views:

“The EU fur import regulations are yet another attack on our people from imperialists, says Thomas Cone, vice-president of the Cree Indian Trappers’ Association to the High North News. Cone lives in a small village in the north of Quebec.

It is a very disturbing piece of legislation, very worrisome, he says. He believes that the animal rights lobby is behind it. I should wish that they (the EU) would have listened to our story first. It is our lives that are affected. This is cultural genocide, they will kill our traditional lifestyle.

The EU market represents 75% of the wild animal fur market and the 13 species on the EU list are the primary species for trapping, Cone stresses. Therefore, the EU regulations will mean loss of income. We have always, through centuries, been attached to the land. Now, we will not be able to afford to go out there. We will be displaced from the land, the link will be cut off. Right now most of my neighbours are out there in the bush trapping.

Cone says that they are working to find the exact figures, but that at least 50,000 Indian people are dependent on trapping. “

#92 R. Workman on 10.03.09 at 8:15 am

I absolutely agree with you on that, Elaine G.

People and governments think that they can “engineer” society by creating restrictive laws which limit or ban certain things which don’t fit their ideology. Not only is it utter poppycock, it’s dangerous. As you have shown, whole cultures are on the verge of being economically wiped out because they can’t sell one of the few natural resources they possess. And, it’s all because some people want to enforce their ideals about how other people should live.

Governments are supposed to make laws to protect people from crime and prevent other dangers. Government’s use of laws to restrict consumer products needs to be limited to things which are patently unsafe. Regulating medicines that are sold to the public or setting safe standards for consumer products are good things that promote public well being.

Banning things like fur just because some people don’t like it is a very bad, dangerous thing to do.

If people don’t like fur, then, fine! Don’t buy it! If enough people don’t buy fur then the producers of fur products will go out of business. It’s just that simple.

But, what’s happening now, as Elaine G. points out is running on the verge of eliminating an entire culture, the Native American (AKA: “Inuit”) culture, just because some people cry about animals which die to make fur.

Sorry! The number of animals harvested for fur amounts to less than 1 percent of the total number of animals that are killed every day for food and other animal products like leather.

Anti-fur people are treading on dangerous ground! Some day, they run the risk of being on the other end of the sword when some other group comes along and decides that something THEY care about should be banned because somebody ELSE cries out in an attempt to socially engineer society.

#93 Melanie on 10.04.09 at 2:23 am

Well this is proof Elaine G. that you don’t read everything I say and only read what you want to interpret…same with you R.Workman
As I indicated my last post was to be my last post as I really have no further interest in this tirade..BUT
Elaine and R. Workman–you make a lovely couple…when is the wedding?
You’re going to have to find someone else to bash as I’m through here…you can now spread your own intolerance, fear, venom to others–you said to me that I’m intolerance, spread fear and venom when you don’t realize you’re doing the same exact thing
My “appreciation” for Native American viewpoints——I’m part Native American and next time you give a link, give one more up to date than news from 15 years ago
As for being pagan/wiccan……I grew UP in this environment and path and not something I just joined up a year or so ago and most pagan/wiccans I KNOW are against fur. According to you Elaine, indigenous peoples wore the animal fur to get the spirt of the animal….yeah maybe years and years ago….My totem animal is the Wolf…so does that mean I need to wear a coat made out of wolf to feel the spirit of the animal??…to me to honor the spirit of the animal would be to keep the fur on its original owner…the wolf not on me

So as the saying goes…….”Elvis has left the building”
Once again..bye bye
Find someone else…in fact this discussion seems to be rather one sided…between you two–don’t see anyone else here do you?

#94 R. Workman on 10.04.09 at 7:34 am

I wasn’t talking to you.

#95 David Dent on 10.05.09 at 12:15 pm

Melanie I regularly buy furs for my collection from indigenous peoples such as the Cree. At the moment they are calling for permission to hunt wolf until such time when Caribou numbers recover from damage done to them by rising wolf poulations and oil pipelines. A wolf can have around 8 pups; a caribou one calf. See the problem? It is the same now as it has always been; the predator- prey balance has to be managed; especially when we are destroying so much of their habitat elsewhere. While the Cree are still trapping and hunting; they protect the land and both animals from development for alternative resources. If you care about the wolf; then realise it only exists in areas that hunting and fur trade are still strong; and vanished from elsewhere.

I buy beaver from the Cree. It is a totem animal of fertility. It is also eaten by them. So do you not consider such fur ethically acceptible? In urban areas of the US and Canada beaver are culled as a pest because they cause massive flooding to developed areas.

#96 misscarrot on 04.07.10 at 11:28 am

I’d just like to point out that real fur garments are not entirely environmentally friendly. They have to be treated in toxic chemicals, because as bodily organs (yes, the skin is an organ) they will literally rot/decompose without some sort of ‘preservative’. So they too contribute to pollution as well as hurting animals.

#97 R. Workman on 04.07.10 at 11:39 pm

There are many different types of tanning. The substances used for each type vary. They run the gamut from simple salt to chromic acid.

The more toxic methods that use things like chromic acid aren’t used very much to tan pelts for furs. It doesn’t produce the soft texture needed for high quality fur garments. You can tell if something was tanned using such methods if you see a bluish green tint in the hide. You’ll see this mostly in leather goods like belts and saddlery.

Fur tanning often uses other chemicals like tannin. It produces a better quality product, plus it isn’t as toxic as chromic acid.

Regardless of the methods used, there are very strict laws governing tanneries. They limit the amounts and types of chemicals that are allowed to be released and they require that effluents be made non toxic before discharge.

Many tanneries recycle their tanning liquors to save money which, in turn, prevents them from generating pollution.

Tanning isn’t entirely without environmental cost but it’s no worse than the exhaust pumped out by the car you drive.

#98 Rob Schneider rules on 04.08.10 at 7:45 pm

Well said, everyone! Now you have to return to the serious business of perusing the pretty photos, choosing a dress and a celebrity and ripping them apart – hoorah!

#99 ... on 10.16.10 at 8:38 am

Fur is disgusting, someone who wears fur is an unhumane and cold person.

#100 R. Workman on 10.16.10 at 12:51 pm

BTW: Do take the time to do a little bit of research on John Jacob Astor, one of the four wealthiest men in American history.

He is the man who donated the money to build the library in New York which later became the New York Public Library. Much of the real estate that NYC is built on was once owned by Astor. He was one of the “power players” who literally built the American economy from the ground up in the years following the Revolutionary War.

Without Astor’s influence, much of the world that we take for granted would not have been possible. At least, not in the way we know it now.

Just so you know, John Jacob Astor built much of his fortune from his first businesses; The American Fur Company and its subsidiaries, the Southwest Fur Company and the Pacific Fur Company. He controlled most of the fur trade in North America from the 1790’s until his death in 1848.

Astor’s business ventured supplied fur to much of the world; England, China and Europe for many years.

We all owe our ability to live, work and express ourselves to John Jacob Astor’s influence.

The irony: Here you stand, speaking out against the very thing that allowed you to exist in the lifestyle you are accustomed to, today.

#101 Arctic1 on 10.18.10 at 9:08 am

I wonder if those leaving abusive comments realise that areas of the arctic are pristine environments affording a great deal of habitat protection to wildlife because of fur trade. By contrast, the sensibilities of urban dwellers further south seem hypocritical to say the least – pollution; exploitation of raw materials; burning of fossil fuels to heat buildings unecessarily; use of petro chemicals in ‘disposable’ clothing etc. I have spent time working with the Sami and also other indigenous peoples around the world ; and wear fur for my work in the arctic and also for fashion reasons. Those of us who are well travelled and let’s say – have a slightly more informed view – are generally supportive of fur and less easily swayed by falsified propaganda.
I suppose ignorance is bliss; and that would be fine if it were not accompanied by aggression that I suspect has rather more to do with people hating than animal loving.

#102 R. Workman on 10.18.10 at 10:08 am


I have always said that people don’t have to like fur if they don’t want to but they can’t go around letting their (negative) emotions cloud their thinking. People shouldn’t go through life hating others for what they believe and they can’t go around trying to ban one thing or another based on emotional grounds.

If I try to get something banned simply because I don’t like it I am, in effect, limiting other people’s lives for arbitrary reasons. Once we start down that slippery slope, there’s no way to stop it. There will come a day when those “fur haters” find themselves in a situation where somebody else will try to limit their freedom and their belief system based on some arbitrary emotional grounds.

Where will we be when that happens?

I believe in environmental *conservation* not “environmentalism.” The difference is that a conservationist uses natural resources to best advantage of society whereas an “environmentalist” is little more than a bunny hugger who spreads hate and half-truth to further a thinly disguised quasi-political agenda.

A conservationist does not want to squander natural resources. He does not cut down trees if it is not wise to do so. He will not destroy natural habitats or use wildlife resources that do not help people to live better. He will when necessary but not unless.

Simply, he thinks of the environment as a businessman thinks of his bank account. He spends money when necessary but saves his money for the future so that, in the end, everybody benefits. If he does not spend his “environmental money” wisely there will be nothing left for the future. If he is wise, it is quite possible that he will have MORE money and resources for EVERYBODY some time down the road.

That is not the way of the “environmentalist” bunny huggers. They simply say, “Do what I tell you or else you are scorned.” They don’t really seem to care about the future of everybody. They just seem to care about themselves. They are just the ploar opposite of those “greedy corporations” who squander the environment for their own short term gain.

We have pretty much shown that the fur haters do not pay attention to reason. They do not study the information given them. I have given them good information two or three times in this message thread. In no case, has that information been paid attention to or even read. They simply dismiss it, out of hand, and continue on with their agenda of hate and scorn.

If people would pay attention in history class, go to the library and read good books or even spend a little bit of time searching Wikipedia, they would have a better understanding of the world around them and they wouldn’t have to go around spreading hate.

I am not here telling people what to believe. I’m telling people to THINK. I don’t want people to change their beliefs based on what I or anybody else, here, says. I just want them to make up their own mind instead of regurgitating made-up facts and preaching half-truths born out of hate.

#103 Brazil on 05.15.13 at 2:36 pm

“I have the right to wear fur”. Actually you don’t. No matter if you think it’s beautiful,gorgeous and blablabla. Nobody gives a sh!t about your beauty. Those animals are more important than your vanity. “I wear because it’s beautiful”… most futile thing I have ever read lol. So childish.

#104 Nutria1 on 05.16.13 at 6:49 am

Of course we have the right to wear fur. We have been doing it for tens of thousands of years and would have been unable to colonise the planet without it. Animals are extremely improtant to the eco system and we must take care of the environment and their habitat, nurture them and use resources sustainably. We have worn fox, reindeer and mink furs ever since we ventured into northern regions. All those animals are still with us in abundance; and the habitat from which they come – the arctic and boreal forest – still relatively undamaged due to fur trade as an economic activity. We have used fox reindeer mink rabbit beaver and
seal for thousands of years and they are all still in those regions in abundance. If you need something you nurture it. Contrast however
with what threatens those habitats now. Our use of unsustainable resources like oil. So it is childish actually to think alternatives to animal based resources are better. It is alternative and unsustainable resources that are the problem. Animals breed quickly while woodland takes hundreds of years to grow and oil takes millions. So use of unsustainables
which destroys habitat,
are the greatest long term threat to animals. So not only do we have the right to wear fur – we actually for the long term future of all animals on the planet – may actually be olbliged to.

Leave a Comment