Archives

During the winter of 2014, fur was everywhere, which made a bad winter even worse for people who care about animals. In urban areas, activists could easily cross paths with hundreds of fur wearers each day – leaving some of us feeling frustrated, helpless and hopeless.

So what do we say, if anything, to people wearing fur in 2015? Does saying nothing and turning a blind eye make us complicit? Author Jonathan Safran Foer once stated, “Not responding is a response – we are equally responsible for what we don’t do.”

But what is the most effective approach with fur wearers? Starting a dialog by asking if the fur is real? Shaming them with the hope that they’ll be skittish about wearing fur in the future? Any discomfort experienced by the people we address pales in comparison to the agony experienced by the animals who they are wearing.

Photo by Emily McCoy

I use several different approaches with the hope that one will emerge as the most effective. When I say, “I love your coat! I hate animals too,” some people respond by laughing nervously. One woman asked if I was being “nasty,” which opened the door to a dialog. She said she “couldn’t argue” with my points but that she also couldn’t give up her “vintage” fur. In the end, I used flattery with her in an attempt to effect change: “I’m sorry, ma’am, but a glamorous woman like you wearing fur encourages others to do the same.” (P.S. Nothing about her was glamorous).

Sometimes I say, “OH MY GOD. Your coat looks just like my dog” with a nonjudgmental, matter of fact tone. Invariably, people respond with a terrified “No” as if I actually thought that they were wearing my dog. By referencing a dog, my hope is to help people connect the dots between companion animals and those used for fur.

Last winter, I placed a few “I am an asshole. I wear fur” stickers on people after “accidentally” stumbling and falling into them. “I’m so sorry! I must have tripped on something.”  I need to get more of those.

PETA, which is still regarded by some as the red paint throwers, suggests a polite approach that could trigger a conversation. They’ve even created an instructional video:

What do you do, and do you think it’s effective?

Sam Simon, the Simpson’s co-creator who has donated millions to animal rights causes since being diagnosed with terminal cancer, is probably having a bigger impact than he ever imagined. That’s because the media are not only reporting on the extent of his philanthropy but are also describing, in detail, the animal abuses that motivate him to give.

In Vanity Fair, a reporter writes about the plight of 17 captive bears whose rescue was funded by Simon: “The bears lived their lives pacing back and forth in the concrete holes of a grim roadside bear-pit attraction in rural Georgia, subsisting on white bread and soda thrown to them by tourists.”

Sam Simon Liberates Bear

In a Reuters story about Simon’s decision to purchase of a fur farm in order to permanently shut it down, the reporter writes that, as Simon walked through the facility’s “cramped rows of mesh-wire cages,” he said to the animals, “This is your last day of abuse. This is your first day of freedom.”

Photo: REUTERS/Mike Blake

During an interview on NBC, Simon talks about “liberating animals from abusive situations” and says that horses in the racing industry are treated as poorly as animals on factory farms.

These are the kinds of messages that animal rights groups would kill for (figuratively speaking) when they talk to the press.

In 2012, Sam Simon bought a $2 million ship for Sea Shepherd, which is being used to protect dolphins, whales and other sea animals from slaughter. If only the Sam Simon could have saved these salmon who, oddly, share his name.

In a statement to Vogue denying that it buys rabbit fur from the factory farms exposed in a new undercover video, fashion giant Burberry says it “will not use fur if there is concern that its production has involved the unacceptable treatment of animals.” Intense confinement and anal electrocution are standard practices in the fur industry. Is either “acceptable” to Burberry?

photo: 2dayblog.com

To make matters worse, Burberry’s use of the phrase “all natural” in defending its use of fur, but “natural” fur is exactly what we are trying to eliminate! Did Burberry think the word “natural” would appease its critics who are advocating for fake fur?

Burberry executives and other fashion houses that use fur are either unaware of the atrocities or are turning a blind eye for the sake of profits. It’s no wonder activists have to jump onto the runway during fashion shows to get their attention.

Please visit endfahsioncruelty.org to take action on behalf of fur bearing animals.

Marc Jacobs, Diane von Furstenberg and Giorgio Armani have refused to comment after being revealed, along with many other world-renowned fashion designers, as customers of fur farmers who were caught on video torturing rabbits.

Last Chance For Animals and Animal Equality, which conducted a two year undercover investigation of 70 rabbit fur farms in Spain, chose fashion week to release both the names of the customers and the outrageous footage taken during their investigation.

Advocates for animals employ many different approaches to ending the horrific fur trade. Some lobby lawmakers to ban the sale of fur; others work to educate or shame fur consumers, designers, retailers; and a small number break into fur farms and liberate animals in the dark of night, at times permanently shutting down the operation.

Regardless of strategy, what we share in common is outrage that millions of helpless animals are intensely confined, abused, neglected and deprived for their entire lives before being executed and skinned – all for the purpose for vanity.

Please visit endfahsioncruelty.org to take action and be a voice for these animals.

Most people will remember Joan Rivers as a trailblazer for women in comedy; for her unparalleled work ethic; for her irreverence; and for her advocacy, philanthropy and generosity. But some will remember her as the poster child for fur. She wore – and glamorized – fur more than just about any other public figure. And that has been a major source of frustration and anger for the countless people who dedicate themselves to ending this most egregious form of animal cruelty.

Ms. Rivers gave the impression that she had misgivings about wearing fur. When people criticized or challenged her, she asked if they wore leather, suggesting that they were just as guilty. She also attempted to justify her fur by saying that she had rescue dogs, as if the kind deed of adopting animals gave her a free pass for other forms of cruelty. When she was challenged by activists at public events, she struck back, saying that her fur was 15 or 20 years old, as if wearing old fur doesn’t generate demand for new fur. As an aside, some of her fur was, in fact, new.

Fur Coat and fur scarf

In the end, Ms. Rivers’ love of fur must have outweighed any guilt that she felt for wearing it. She had many opportunities to do the right thing by renouncing fur, as her own daughter Melissa did in a commercial for PETA, but she instead defended it and, at times, displayed contempt for those who challenged her, as shown in this video taken in July, 2014:

Because of her fame and unmatched consumption of fur, Joan Rivers will be one of the faces of fur when society relegates this barbaric form of animal cruelty to the history books. Now that she’s gone, will she come face-to-face with the hundreds off animals who were tortured and killed for her vanity?