Fur Coats
Fur Coats: Yea or Nay
The problem I have with the fur debate is that both sides present it as too simplistic of a choice. Like most things in life, it’s not a simple black or white issue.
The Fur Coat Debate: It’s a Gray… Very Gray... Area
My friend Miss Meghan and I always have this discussion about growing up in the ridiculously cold upper Midwest and seeing women at the grocery stores in their long fur coats. In any other part of the country, this display of wealth would seem ostentatious, but in the pre-thinsulate, absurdly cold upper Midwest, the wearing of fur coast wasn’t only about fashion, but also about warmth. Did they need their fur coats? Well that’s debatable- it did serve a function, but a wool coat ( a really thick wool coat) would have done just fine.
In many communities, such as the African-American communities that I belong to, having a fur coat is a symbol of success and/or a reward for a lifetime of hard work and sacrifice. Now, are there better ways to reward yourself? Sure, in fact I could name about 10. However, who I am to tell my 70 year old aunts, who endured 40 years of sh*t working for people who didn’t appreciate them that they can’t buy the one thing they always wanted. I can only imagine what would happen if a protester threw red paint on them as they walked up the steps to church.
So I ask you, is fur an absolute nay or yea? Is there a gray area? What about those of us who inherited fur coats? What happens when the personal (fashion) collides with the political (anti-fur)?
Note: I’m not passing judgment on anyone who owns a fur and I actually support those who are against it for ethical/political reasons. However, I inherited a fabulous fur (it’s seriously fab) , which I will not sell or destroy for personal reasons. At the same time, I wouldn’t go out and purchase a fur myself. I think a lot of people fall into the gray area with me.
P.S. Please be respectful to each other in this debate. I don’t like deleting comments, but I will.
Major Department Stores Caught Selling Dog Fur Coats: The Fake Debate Takes On a Whole New Level
UPDATE: The Dog and Cat Fur Prohibition Enforcement Act, H.R. 891 DID NOT MAKE IT OUT OF IT’S HOUSE COMMITTEE AND WAS NOT BROUGHT UP FOR A VOTE ON THE HOUSE FLOOR
A story broke a few weeks ago about major retailers/designers like Tommy Hilfiger and Nordstrom, selling “faux fur” jackets really made out of dog fur (yes, fur from fido). Regardless of where you fall in the fur debate, this is a pretty disturbing story. Not to say that dogs are “more important animals” than say rabbits, cows, or minks (what is the plural of minks? Minx?), it’s just that when you purchase a mink coat, you KNOW you’re purchasing a mink coat and in this case it seems that several animal lovers may have purchased items that were made from dogs.
From the Associated Press:
The Humane Society of the United States said it purchased coats from reputable outlets, such as upscale Nordstrom, with designer labels—Andrew Marc, Tommy Hilfiger, for example and found them trimmed with fur from domestic dogs, even though the fur was advertised as fake.
In response to the public outcry regarding this issue, members of Congress recently drafted The Dog and Cat Fur Prohibition Enforcement Act, H.R. 891, which “aims to strengthen the current law and protect consumers and animals by outlawing the import of fur from raccoon dogs and requiring all garments trimmed with fur to be labeled, regardless of value.”
I can’t help wondering why a manufacturer would use dog fur in the first place? I would think that using animal fur is a much more difficult process (you have to catch the animal, prepare the hide, etc.). Isn’t cheaper to just use faux fur? As a bargain shopper, I’ve always suspected that something was fishy (or should I say doggie) with some of the faux fur items I’ve purchased.
Advertisement
Featured on TBF
Copyright 2003-2009 TBF Group, LLC.