We noticed you're blocking ads.

Keep supporting great journalism by turning off your ad blocker.

Questions about why you are seeing this? Contact us

Font Size

- Aa +

Sun 17 Jan 2016 04:27 PM

Font Size

- Aa +

Viewpoint: why you shouldn’t feel guilty about wearing fur

There are moral ways of obtaining it, argues Arabian business

Viewpoint: why you shouldn’t feel guilty about wearing fur
You can argue the immorality of fur for as long as you want. But, at the end of the day, there are moral ways of obtaining and wearing it - and the days of inducing guilt on fur wearers should be over. Here’s why...
Viewpoint: why you shouldn’t feel guilty about wearing fur
1. Because there are moral ways of obtaining fur:

\nOne moral way of obtaining fur is from invasive species that are killed to protect fragile eco-systems. For species to be considered invasive, they must be non-native and harmful to the environment. (Though I can already feel the judgemental comments on “the inhumanity of terminating invasive animals i.e. “How would you like it if you were invasive” as my friend put it the other day,” allow me to explain further).

\nA rodent called nutria, found in the coastal areas of the United States, has been chomping on marsh plants at their bases, causing them to die at the roots and permanently disappear.

\nThanks to the nutria, an area the size of Delaware has disappeared into the Gulf of Mexico.

\nEnvironments are not the only ones to suffer from invasive animals, however. In parts of Russia (like Khabarovsk and Primorsky), bears have been attacking and eating – I repeat, eating – people because of lack of food in forests.

\nAs a result, 58 black and brown bears were shot to protect people.

\nHow did animal rights respond? By asking for the killings to stop, of course. However, bears were killing and eating people as an act of survival, and people were doing the same. Why do these bears have the right to live and people don’t? Now, let’s get back to the fur.

\nAccordingly, fur from these bears and rodents like the nutria can be used for clothing purposes.

\nAccording to Michael Massimi, a coordinator for an Environmental Protective Agency, told Style Caster magazine 90 percent of the nutria carcasses harvested are thrown away. Last season, there were half a million carcasses dumped in the garbage.

\nCall me inhuman, but if the nutria’s fur is being dumped, why can’t I wear it? You don’t hunt a salmon fish to eat it and then throw away its caviar. How is this any different? How is wearing fur from a dead animal different than eating baby fish eggs?

\nAnother moral way of obtaining fur is through animals killed by roadkill. The number of roadkill in the United Sates ranges int he hundreds of millions of animals. This is according to Petite Mort Fur, a company that manufactures fur products from animals that were victims of roadkill.

\nClearly, these sources of fur are going to be there - whether we to use them or not.

\nThat said, both of these ways are side businesses when it comes to fur. Still, a lot of fur is acquired from fur farms. I think that fur farms could be lessened and adjusted according to demand. There is more fur produced than there is demand for. In addition, while a lot of farms are regulated, some are not. In those cases, the torture of animals does occur – there is no denying that. And the torture of these animals should stop – there is no question when it comes to that.
Viewpoint: why you shouldn’t feel guilty about wearing fur
2. Because if you want to talk about fur, you have to talk about leather, poultry, fish, and that steak you had last night

\nOn every occasion that I’ve worn my fur coat on, I’ve gotten a ton of comments on the “poor rabbits that had to die for my fashion taste.” I get none of these comments, however, while I’m consuming a rare medium steak or sporting a pair of leather shoes.

\nWhy is that? Because most people don’t want to cut out meat from their diets. They like it and they want to eat it.

\nClearly, this is controversial. Because if you want to be righteous, you have to be righteous in all aspects, not only the ones that suit you.

\nIn addition, according to Style Caster magazine, there were almost 9 billion farm animals slaughtered by the meat industry in the US alone.

\nWorldwide, the same number for fur animals is 50 million. Keep in mind, a lot of the fur animals slaughtered are also slaughtered for their meat, like rabbit and bear meat.

\nAlso, I’d like to point out that while one fur coat can be worn for generations (it lasts up to 20 years according to several experts) a steak in consumed in less than half an hour (10 minutes if you were really hungry).
Viewpoint: why you shouldn’t feel guilty about wearing fur
3. Because it reaches -90 degrees Fahrenheit in Russia (and faux fur will not do the trick):

\nLet’s make one thing clear, temperatures in parts of Russia (like Verkhoyansk, Oymyakon, and Yakutsk) range between minus 80 degrees Celsius and minus 40 degrees Celsius in most months of the year.

\nPETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals) argues that faux furs are proof that it’s easy to “look fabulous and stay warm without bludgeoning, electrocuting, and skinning animals alive on cruel fur farms.”

\nFurther to reading that statement, I don’t think PETA understands the meaning of minus 80 degrees Celsius. Because if it did, it would know that nothing can warm a person in these conditions except for fur.

\nThat’s why people in Antarctica wear fur. I doubt they care much about “looking fabulous.”

\nFur is made for warmth from cold – that’s why huskies and polar bears have such thick fur and can’t live in hot weather, but can survive in the coldest winters. Would polar bears survive with faux fur?
Viewpoint: why you shouldn’t feel guilty about wearing fur
4. Because contrary to popular belief, fur is eco-friendly:

\nTorben Nielsen, CEO of Kopenhagen Fur, the Danish body that manages sales for the country’s fur farmers, told the Daily Mail that fur is an eco-friendly material and green choice.

\nHe stated that fashion is one of the world’s most polluting industries and is not very green. He explained that cotton demands a large amount of pesticides which pollute the environment and last only half a year as a piece of clothing.

\nBecause most fur is expensive, people don’t throw it away easily. And it has a lifetime of 20 years or more.

\nIn addition, fur can be recycled and used for animals. Yes, for animals.

\nBuffalo Exchange, a second-hand clothing chain in the US, accepts donations of real fur for animal rehabilitation centres. These centres use the material as comforting bedding for injured and orphaned animals. These animals are not as horrified by the fur they sleep on as most people are by the mere thought of it.
Viewpoint: why you shouldn’t feel guilty about wearing fur
5. Because PETA needs to calm down

\nPETA argues that animals are not ours to eat, wear, experiment on, use for entertainment, or abuse in any other way. Here’s the thing though, animals eat each other for survival purposes. So why can’t we eat them? And when it comes to entertainment, if dogs are being groomed in their own pet salons before a show, are their lives really that bad?

\nThere are probably more pet salons than kids’ salons nowadays.

\nIn addition, PETA’s answer to people who wear fur – regardless of where they got it from – is to throw red paint on them. So while it argues against violence, it treats anyone who disagrees WITH violence. How is that acceptable?

\nPETA wants to enforce its opinion regardless of the arguments of others and whether or not they got their fur legally and morally – or whether they need it so they don't freeze in the middle of Russia.

\nHowever, at the end of the day, fur wearer or faux fur wearer, we’re all against the torture of animals.
Viewpoint: why you shouldn’t feel guilty about wearing fur
6. Because people donate their organs, so why can’t animals donate their fur?

\nI do agree that fur farms could be decreased – even though some fur animals are used for their meat just as much as for their fur, and I do agree that reforms must be imlemented in the fur industry, just like a lot of reforms are needed worldwide i.e. the crisis of refugees - however, I couldn’t agree on discarding the fur of already deceased animals.

\nWhy is it okay to cut open a person after death and take his/her heart and not okay to take a rabbit’s fur?

\nOften, animal rights groups protect animals to an extent that they put the animals’ rights above their own – calling them as equal as humans.

\nThey often forget that there are no rights in the wild, where animals live.

\nThey forget that if they’re left in the wild with a hungry bear, they will be eaten – without a “humans’ rights” discussion.