Discussion in 'protest, direct action and demos' started by editor, Jun 8, 2018.
I really don't see the need for fur these days, I get along without it easily.
Who gives a fuck, seriously? What does it matter?
Yes, Canada Goose uses coyote fur for their collars. Who cares?
It's kind of sad that coyotes are being shot and trapped, but this would happen anyway whether or not Canada Goose is using their fur for collars.
What's really killing off a lot of coyotes and countless animals is that human activity is wiping out their habitat, and the habitat of a lot of other animals, but that stuff isn't easy to boycott, because we're all part of it.
So a more appropriate slogan would be "Boycott everything. The planet-fucking scumbags" - because the world's on fire and nobody cares.
I think the coats were designed for bitter winters in Canada.
The company is up front about the fur on the hoods.
"fur in Canada Goose products is never obtained from endangered species, but rather exclusively from certified trappers at NAFA fur auctions."
My point being...
Anyone buying one of their coats with a fur hood knows exactly what they are getting....
I fish and shoot (rabbits and wiodpigeons mainly) to eat, but fur trapping in this way seems especially cruel. And its product is completely unnecessary for UK conditions. Of course, I recognise the bigger threat to wildlife caused by the destruction of habitat, by man.
Why is it worse than raising and killing them for food?
Anyone who has ever spent time outdoors in Canada..or Russia...or near the arctic circle knows that in winter fur is worn for warmth. In many instances the fur is the lining a heavy coat. Its not even visible...point being it's not a fashion statement. And yes.. it is warmer than manmade stuff.
People In the UK and Ireland never experience the extreme cold that they do in parts of Canada. So there is no need for fur...fur would be too warm. So anyone wearing real fur in the UK is doing so for fashion...not warmth.
Having said all that...I hold my hand up and say that I have a 60 yr old fur coat which belonged to my aunt. And I am not throwing it out. It kept me very warm this winter on top of my bed. And if there was a mini ice age and temperatures dropped to -20 I would wear it to stay warm.
Eta. I would never buy a fur jacket or coat though...
I admire your nihilistic style. Rant that is, not fashion.
The only reasons I wouldn't buy it are that I don't particularly like the look of it and it's wearer is likely to be assaulted. Anyone who's happy to consume intensively farmed meat but has a problem with farmed fur is a hypocrite.
I have to say....you've got one hell of a point.
How many of us have smart phones? Made in factories where working conditions are very poor...filled with materials mined by poverty stricken people in areas that are being destroyed by mining. What is the real cost to the planet...to third world countries......to nature and the environment....of everything we have and use every single day?
Because we need to eat (yes, I know there's vegetarian/vegan options)
I should have added that I would not buy new fur...
I did buy a jacket with a fur collar in a second hand shop about 18 years ago. Turned out the fur was rabbit fur.
My parents grew up hunting and cooking rabbits. But I have only the cutesy image of a rabbit so I tend to not wear that collar.
Pah, we need to wear clothes too.
They don't have to be skins. There's lots of very viable alternatives that don't involve any cruelty. If we are to eat meat there's the option to use the skins for clothing, we don't need to raise animals purely for skins.
The same argument is made for meat.
I can see no difference. We need to eat and need clothes to keep warm. We can use animals for either, neither or both.
My original argument was, and remains, that raising animals for food, is relatively acceptable when compared to raising them solely for the pelt. I am not debating, here, the rights or wrongs of meat eating.
Because the pelt is a by-product of meat production. If we are going to eat meat, then I think we should use as much of the animal as possible.
But why is it more morally justifiable to farm animals for meat than it is for fur?
“Because we eat them” doesn’t cut it. We don’t need to do either.
As I have said, I'm not debating the rights and wrongs of eating meat. I'm simply saying that if we are going to raise animals for food it's less bad to use all the animal, including the pelt, than to raise an animal only for the pelt.
Yeah. But WHY?
Can i have that as my new tagline?
I overheard this dad with his toddler on the tube other day and the little boy was constantly going 'why', as they do at age 3 or whatever. The dad was great, conversation started with why do we have to have tickets and ended up including such things as why the government doesn't just pay for all the rolling stock and line maintenance in the first place.
Because, as I keep saying, if you are going to breed and eat an animal...etc
But WHY is it worse to breed an animal purely for its fur than it is to breed an animal for its meat?
Because we need to eat. If that means, rightly or wrongly, raising animals to kill and eat then that is acceptable. Raising an animal for just the pelt and discarding the rest is, in my opinion, wrong. We don't need to dress in fur in this day and age, but we do need to eat. I'm not saying that it is right or wrong to eat meat, just that we do need to eat, but don't have to wear animal skins. If we are going to raise animals for food then let's use all the animal, don't just throw away some of it.
This entire exchange is making me laugh
Fuck me, Des
We don’t need to eat MEAT. We choose to.
We need to wear clothes. Why is it worse to farm mink for their pelts than to farm chicken for nuggets?
it isn't they're both equally bad
Farm chicken for nuggets
spymaster's never had chicken any other way
Separate names with a comma.