Fur Question!

[Lily Powers]

So many lovely vintage coats have fur trim on them - and I love the look of them (only looking at photos at the weekend of my Gran in her fur coat - she looked so glam!) but I just can't bring myself to wear it.

Miss Golightly, your sentiments echo mine on this matter.

Sheeplady, you posted a link to a news report about real fur being passed off as faux. In response to that irresponsible and false labeling of raccoon dog fur as "faux," the Humane Society released these guidelines for consumers who want to be sure their "faux" is really faux. It's a short, informative article with a couple of pictures to illustrate what to look for when trying to discern faux from real.

 

[Miss Golightly]

Thanks again everyone for your thoughts and suggestions - much appreciated!

BunnyB.Gal - thank you for the pattern - I'm not the greatest when it comes to sewing (buttons and putting up hems would be my main talents!) - but you never know - it could be something I attempt down the line!

Sometimes if it's really really shiny you can tell, but since that shot somewhat dark I don't know... I guess if it's reasonable, if you get it and it's real you could resell it?

Lauren - I think I could buy it and just see for myself - it won't break the bank and if doesn't work out I suppose I could sell it.

I bought a really great faux fur scarf/collar from Topshop last winter, and also have a winter coat from Debenhams that comes with a removable collar - I haven't tried it but if you got a cardi with one waist button, I am sure you could find modern faux fur collars and attach them, no? Sounds like an easier method. Asos also had quite a few, but can't tell you what quality they are as I haven't seen them IRL.

Drappa - I've seen those kinds of cardi's in Wallis and on ASOS in the past so I'll keep my eye out. I've also had a look at some faux collars so that could be an option too.

Miss Golightly, your sentiments echo mine on this matter.

Sheeplady, you posted a link to a news report about real fur being passed off as faux. In response to that irresponsible and false labeling of raccoon dog fur as "faux," the Humane Society released these guidelines for consumers who want to be sure their "faux" is really faux. It's a short, informative article with a couple of pictures to illustrate what to look for when trying to discern faux from real.

Lily Powers - thank you so much for the link - that's so helpful - I have sent on the link to the seller and am waiting to hear back and see what she says - will keep you all posted!

Equally, however, I can see the merit in the argument that suggests that wearing vintage fur to some extent helps to legitimise the modern fur trade by maintaining the notion that wearing fur in general is acceptable. I oscillate between the two views myself, to be honest. I have no ethical discomfort over vintage fur, but at the same time I'd hate to think I was 'legitimising' the contemporary trade.

I know what you mean - it's like where is the cut off point for vintage fur? People could argue that today's fur is tomorrows vintage.....

 

[sheeplady]

Miss Golightly, your sentiments echo mine on this matter.

Sheeplady, you posted a link to a news report about real fur being passed off as faux. In response to that irresponsible and false labeling of raccoon dog fur as "faux," the Humane Society released these guidelines for consumers who want to be sure their "faux" is really faux. It's a short, informative article with a couple of pictures to illustrate what to look for when trying to discern faux from real.

Thank you for that! Even though it is not useful to me (I just feel weird in fur, but maybe that will change as I mature more), I will pass on those tips to people I know are interested in such things.

 

[Miss Golightly]

Well the seller got back to me after I sent her Lily Powers helpful link and she confirmed that it's faux. Well perhaps it is - there is always a possibility that it always had a faux collar or a faux one was added at a later date - I have seen some of those same cardigans for sale without the collar and you can see the hook and eye thingies (not hooks and eyes though - the ones that you press together - sorry I don't know the name).

I'll have a little think about it now.......

 

[Lily Powers]

Well the seller got back to me after I sent her Lily Powers helpful link and she confirmed that it's faux. Well perhaps it is - there is always a possibility that it always had a faux collar or a faux one was added at a later date - I have seen some of those same cardigans for sale without the collar and you can see the hook and eye thingies (not hooks and eyes though - the ones that you press together - sorry I don't know the name).

I'll have a little think about it now.......

I've seen a lot of plush fabrics on new cardigans that mimic the look of fur. They happen to be the same fabric that my cat's blankie is made from, and I just don't want to wear something that looks like my cat's bed (although the cat would be quite happy if I did). If the seller is agreeable, perhaps she would let you purchase it and if it's real fur, maybe she'd take a return and give you a credit for a future purchase (or even a full refund).

 

[lareine]

That collar looks very real -- if it's fake fur I'd love to know where to find more like it!

I always thought I'd never wear real fur, but I am going to buy some possum fur shoe liners to keep my feet toasty this winter. Possums are a pest in New Zealand and exterminated as such, so the fur is a totally guilt-free product of that process. And it is so soft. Possum fur is also mixed with merino wool to make the softest yarn you could imagine. I feel sorry for the little possums being exterminated, but at least their skins can be used afterwards.

 

[Drappa]

I swore I wasn't going to comment on the fur issue, but couldn't let this go. Animals are not "pests" until someone decides to call them that. I bet to many wild animals humans are the worst pests around because we infringe on all their living spaces, are noisy and violent and keep on multiplying even in times of a shortage of supplies. That doesn't mean we ahould be lined up and shot for disturbing the eco-system.
So from my standpoint simply declaring some being a "pest" doesn't make it more ethical to kill it or a guilt-free indulgence.

 

[lareine]

Drappa, you need to do some research on possums in New Zealand before you respond any further.

 

[Drappa]

With all due respect, no I don't. I know the argument well, they have the exact same about badgers and foxes in the UK, deer in various countries, and kangaroos in Australia. The fact that there are "too many" of something won't change my mind on the supposed morality of it.

 

[lareine]

You really do need to research this if you are going to comment on it in a thread about fur rather than animal rights. Here, I'll point you in the right direction.

Here is a summary of the situation:
- possums were very recently introduced to this country, and became bigger and more aggressive than in Australia because the climate here and lack of predators worked to their advantage
- possums are one of the introduced species responsible for decimating eggs and babies of native animals and birds
- possums are not exterminated for their fur
- possums will continue to be exterminated whether or not their fur is used for anything

If you disagree with possum extermination then feel free to take it up with the authorities in New Zealand. If you disagree with using the fur of an animal that is already dead so that it doesn't go to waste completely then you will have to explain that further for me to understand your point.

 

[Katinka von K.]

I´m with Drappa on this one: There are also more human beings around on this planet than we can handle. We shouldn´t start shooting each othe anyways. The question is: Why are there too many animals of one species and are they really to many or are they just more than humanity is willing to accept because of economic ideas (farming for example). During the last centuries mankind manipulated nature by bringing animals to places they don´t belong to, where they probably don´t have any natural enemies and are able to spread as they want or by changing their habitat. We ourselves caused the pests and shouldn´t use it as an excuse. Just my humble opinion.



Edit: I just see I was to slow typing. Of course you have to do something to save endemic species but I feel that its not right to take advantage, in this case nice fluffy fur, from such a big mistake.

 

[Drappa]

It is impossible to distinguish a thread about fur from animal rights topics.
I don't disagree with the use of fur, if that is what people chose to do. What I disagree with is coming up with all sorts of faulty justifications on why it is okay to use some fur as opposed to other fur. Using possum furs because they will be exterminated anyway doesn't make that kind of fur any more ethical than farmed fur, as it supports the extermination even if it is not the sole cause.
On your last point, I don't see what the argument here is. If people are vegetarian for example, they don't eat meat even though the cattle, sheep, chickens etc. are going to be killed whether they eat them or not. If they go into a supermarket, the animals for sale are already dead, so by your argument it doesn't matter if you eat them or not, because they are dead and the industry will continue to kill them. However, one could also say that the less meat people eat, the less demand there is, the less animals will be killed for meat.
Saying "well, it doesn't matter, they're already dead and everybody else does it" is a justification, not an argument. It is merely an attempt of absolving oneself of any kind of responsibility or value statement, which is what I disagree with.

Sorry Miss Golightly, didn't mean to hijack your thread, even though I did.

 

[lareine]

Oh and just for the record I'm not supporting or decrying the extermination of any animal. As I said in my original post, I feel sorry for the possums, and it's not like buying possum fur supports possum extermination. Using the fur in this case carries no guilt whatsoever -- it's equivalent to using rat fur in a city where rats are a pest and are going to be killed anyway. Nobody is crying out for possum fur any more than they're crying out for rat fur, so it is purely a byproduct of a totally unrelated animal control process.

Possums will be exterminated in New Zealand no matter what. They had been exterminated for quite a while before somebody figured out how to make use of the fur. The fur industry does not cause the deaths of possums. Too bad, they're already dead.

Edit: Drappa, please do your research before you comment further. Seriously. You obviously don't understand the situation, which I think is unique to New Zealand and possums.

 

[Drappa]

I´m with Drappa on this one: There are also more human beings around on this planet than we can handle. We shouldn´t start shooting each othe anyways. The question is: Why are there too many animals of one species and are they really to many or are they just more than humanity is willing to accept because of economic ideas (farming for example). During the last centuries mankind manipulated nature by bringing animals to places they don´t belong to, where they probably don´t have any natural enemies and are able to spread as they want or by changing their habitat. We ourselves caused the pests and shouldn´t use it as an excuse. Just my humble opinion.



Edit: I just see I was to slow typing.

Yes, indeed. Wolves were killed relentlessly because they were a nuisance to farmers. Guess what, it upset the eco-system, so now humans are trying to introduce them back into areas they lived in before, and are having a hard time with it. It also didn't take long for farmers to complain about wolves again, either.
If there is an imbalance in the natural world, it is always due to human fault or accidents, and it always gets taken out on animals.

 

[Drappa]

Oh and just for the record I'm not supporting or decrying the extermination of any animal. As I said in my original post, I feel sorry for the possums, and it's not like buying possum fur supports possum extermination. Using the fur in this case carries no guilt whatsoever -- it's equivalent to using rat fur in a city where rats are a pest and are going to be killed anyway. Nobody is crying out for possum fur any more than they're crying out for rat fur, so it is purely a byproduct of a totally unrelated animal control process.

Possums will be exterminated in New Zealand no matter what. They had been exterminated for quite a while before somebody figured out how to make use of the fur. The fur industry does not cause the deaths of possums. Too bad, they're already dead.

Edit: Drappa, please do your research before you comment further. Seriously. You obviously don't understand the situation, which I think is unique to New Zealand and possums.

Good grief, stop telling me to research something when you are not even making an argument. I am quite free to comment on whatever you present, as it's a public forum. I am quite aware of why possums are considered problematic where you live. I am simply saying that your assumptions above are wrong. Wearing fur of an animal does support it's extermination in a way, because they are not killed accidentally. Your statement that you neither support nor decry the extermination of an animal is also wrong, as you claim that it is guilt-free to do so. I say it isn't for the reasons stated above. You are simply presenting justifications and presenting a hierarchy of animals whose fur is okay to wear or kill, ie "pests" are okay because they are considered a problem in NZ.
Going by your line of reasoning, nobody would have to take a stand on anything or do something about any injustice in the world at all, because well, things happen regardless. People still die from lack of resources or diseases, for instance, or in wars, so we don't need to become activists about anything at all because some industries are just exploitative and our choices have no impact whatsoever. I say we do, and every choice we make has an impact somehow.
And FYI, I also wouldn't wear rat-fur, fox-fur or badger-fur. I understand some people like to wear fur, and that is their prerogative, as long as they admit it at least.

 

[lareine]

LOL Drappa, you're very sweet and obviously care a lot about animals. Nobody is suggesting we should kill animals for their fur. That would be inhumane. Your passion is endearing

 

[Drappa]

^No need to be nasty and patronising.

So let's be less condescending and dissect the issue, just so there are no misunderstandings

The problem is that you conflate several issues. The question of whether it’s immoral to use animal fur does not depend on whether they are already dead or not. Your argument, such as it is, is that it would be wasteful not to make use of a resource like possum skins. However, there are two difficulties with this:

The original issue is that people caused the problem of possums as pests, which the NZ authorities have decided to address via extermination. By purchasing the fur that is a by-product of this process you are indirectly supporting it. This won’t make any difference to you (since you agree that they are pests and should be exterminated) but the key point is that the decision to buy the fur is not a neutral one: it economically supports the practice of extermination and it is a non sequitur that possums will continue to be exterminated if no one buys their fur.

It is right that some possums will still be exterminated but the economic motive for the practice would have been removed, making it less profitable and hence more attractive to consider other options. Now, you could claim that there are no other options for "possum control", we either exterminate them or let them run wild, but maybe it would be a good idea to do some research yourself that supports that notion of there only being these two options. Admittedly, they are the easy options, but not the only ones.

Economic decisions are never neutral. The nature of supply and demand is such that if you increase the demand (for example, by making possum slippers) then it influences the supply by making it profitable to turn possums into slippers. There are other products that could be made instead (a basic example would be to boil them down for glue) so buying the slippers isn’t neutral and has consequences. Moreover, in moral terms the customer has a choice whether to support the extermination of possums (by buying slippers) or not (by not buying them); these decisions then either increase the likelihood of the government seeking other ways to control possums or decrease it.

Finally, and the biggest problem with your argument, the economic motive for killing animals for their fur is aided by purchasing possum slippers. That is, if you make it profitable to manufacture possum slippers, even if they come from “already dead” possums, you create a market motive for other fur goods (not least because most people don’t check where their goods are sourced from). It’s because of this creation of a market that using already dead possums contributes to the death of other animals for fur, unless you somehow make it illegal to slaughter animals for fur; but if you do this then the fur goods manufacturers will point to the possum slipper market as hypocrisy on the part of the government. Either way, the slippers create a motive for people to kill animals for their fur.

 

[lareine]

Gosh, you're being touchy, Drappa! I was being nice and trying to explain things to you, but if you have your mind firmly made up and won't do any research then that's fine, let's just say no more about it and pretend like this conversation never happened :hippie:

 

[Drappa]

:deadhorse Nevermind. If trying to tell someone they aren't allowed to comment until they do unneccessary research is "being nice", I wouldn't want to get on your bad side.
I'm bowing out of this now, so no need for last condescending comments.

 

[lareine]

Awww sweetie don't take it to heart. We are all good! Mwah! Have a good day hun x