Naked Valentines Fur Protest

Original idea.

Oh, okay, I will only wear plastic coats, there are absolutely no problems at all with the production of man-made plastic fibers from oil! No wait, I have a better idea, I will wear a cotton coat, who cares what all the pesticides used on cotton do. I guess I could wear wool but I have worked on an Australian sheep farm and and always felt bad to see all the dead sheep that die of exposure after getting shorn.

There are no simple answers, but I would rather wear fur than a darn plastic coat made by the filthy dirty petro-chemical industry! Curse all the stupid animal rights activists that are killing the planet!!!!!!

Hi Pokoroto,

It takes 20 times more energy to produce fur than it is to produce synthetics.  It's a fact, the University of Chicago did a study and that's what they've found.  Those wearing fur do not only wear fur, they have coats made of synthetics as well.  How do I know that?  It's easy.  Fur is inferior in standing up to real harsh weather conditions.  I think if we still lived in the 1700's, fur would make sense, but in 2009, consumers prefer to have waterproof, lightweight and windproof garments to wear in cold weathers.  This is why arctic explorers don't wear fur. If they wore fur, they will freeze.  I know a few fur wearers and they always take out their synthetics when the weather gets bad.  Fur is for vanity only, it serves no practical purpose.  And indeed those wearing fur trim items are already wearing jackets made of all the other materials you are boo booing.  So if they just wore the jacket without the trim, it would be a lot better for the environment.  Want not, waste not.

Joanne

Excellent article. I'm glad to see the media (and activists) raising this issue for those who don't know. Happy Valentine's Day - make love, not fur!

"Analy electrocuted"?  That is simply uncalled for.  Unless of course your into that sort of thing.  Not that there's anything wrong with it.

" Fur is inferior in standing up to real harsh weather conditions."; is absolutely untrue.  A caribou coat is by far the warmest, the hairs are hollow which traps air.  People don't like to wear fur in the rain because they are proper care is tiresome. Fur trimmings on hoods are very important for preventing frostbite.

Where is this University of Chicago study? If you don't know stop parroting PETA propaganda. In fact the study to which you refer was done by the University of Michigan and it was 1 study that was quickly rebuked by Ethical Consumer magazine and many others.

Funny, other posters elsewhere claim the "University of Chicago" study proves fur takes 60 times more energy.  The "University of Chicago" study was done by an engineer at Ford that has his own ax to grind. One paper by one man who wants to attention away from what his company does, does not make a fact.

Instead of hundreds of people misquoting the same flawed study, done years ago can you provide and other information?

Beavers are big rats that breed like rabbits and the Government of Manitoba must implement cull programs to keep the beavers from cutting down all the trees and flooding every ditch.  There are as many beaver as people in Manitoba because   the decline of the well balanced between trappers and beaver.  Now the government has been forced to pay trappers to kill them, to try to control the population.

Coyotes numbers , in Manitoba are stable thanks to the 7000 killed every year by hunters for their fur. If hunters did not kill any the population would explode and that would be bad.

I forgot to mention that Goretex is teflon, go have a look at what teflon is doing to the environment and human health.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PFOA

Hi Pokoroto,

You're absolutely right,  I don't own a Goretex jacket nor do I own any fur.  So I must be covered in frost bites.  It's a miracle I'm still alive.

And I am very glad you are wearing fur coats, fur underwear, fur pants, fur socks, fur shoes and fur t-shirts because you care so much about the environment that you don't wear anything but untreated fur. 

For you, fur is not a vanity item.  You don't own anything but untreated fur just taken off the bodies of coyotes whose population is exploding out of control.  Thanks for saving the world, Pokoroto!  This world would be overrun with coyotes if it wasn't for you and the heroic fur industry.  Thanks for saving the human race from coyotes!

I think I should go out now and buy a fur coat in addition to the organic bamboo jacket I already have.  I'll have to buy a fur trim to add to the hood of my jacket.  I'll do it to help save the environment!

Thanks for showing me the light, Pokoroto. 

So what is your solution to the beaver problem, kill all the people?

It is fine if you don't wear fur as long as you understand the beavers are going to be killed anyway. What a waste just to kill them and leave the fur to rot.

80% of the world's fur comes from fur farms.  Animals that are bred and raised for the purpose of producing fur.  These animals should not exist in the first place but are created by the fur industry, producing millions of tons of feces that gets dumped into our rivers.

Trapped fur is not very profitable because it's highly inefficient and turns a much lower profit when compared to fur farming.  The problem with trapping too is the by-catch issue.  For every target animal caught 4 non-target animals are trapped and discarded.  Many of the by-catch animals are endangered species as traps are indiscriminate.   In order to catch one beaver 3 other animals would have to walk into the trap and killed.

Last time I checked in the stores, I didn't see any beaver fur.  However, I did see a lot of fox, mink, rabbit, chinchilla, dog & cat fur.  Most of it from China and most of them raised in farms.

I'm not aware of any beaver over population issue that is threatening to humans in any way.  I don't understand why is it that you either have to kill beavers or humans? 

Honestly Pokoroto, I find it deeply disturbing that you must kill an animal or a human in order to be satisfied.

Pokoroto is right. There are no simple answers to this. If you dont want to wear fur because you dont like the killing of animals, then fine, that is your choice. But it doesnt mean you are right.  Just about everything we do, because there are such huge numbers of us, results in death and suffering to our fellow creatures on this planet. you can't hide away from this fact. if you want to live our Western lifestyle, you are going to harm animals

Each method of garment production results in suffering and eco damage in some way. It is inevitable. If each one of us produced our own clothing from growing our own cotton, hunting our own animals for fur etc. You wouldnt notice the suffering involved. There are such huge numbers of H sapiens now though that this would be impractical. Production methods have to be concentrated in one place, resulting in "In your face" evidence of the killing and eco destruction that results.

Look up The Arral Sea disaster if you want to see what REAL eco destruction, and destruction of wildlife is all about, and all this so we could wear our T shirts ????. In comparison the damage caused by the fur industry is tiny.

We all have to make choices. most of them have to be  a compromise. None are perfect when it comes to protecting other creatures. Love it or hate it, wearing fur is a reasonable compromise compared to some of the other options available

OK Doug, I did not realize that there are so many of you out there who only wear fur.  Do you wear fur underwear and fur t-shirts just like Pokoroto?  You wear fur instead of cotton...yes, I find that believable. 

Or do you just indiscriminately wear everything that is going to kill the environment, cuz heck, you're already doing it so why not go all the way! 

I have one suggestion for you.  It is great to wear hats lined with lead.  It looks FANTASTIC!  I mean why wouldn't you do it? You're already expose youself to harmful chemicals just by living the Western lifestyle!

I'm with poloroto and Dogz.  Note that instead of addressing the flawed information that she is parroting, Joanne would rather delve into emotionalism and try to get the last word in.  What exactly was the point of that post, anyway?  It is an issue of production, not the need to cut back on fur, meat, eggs, cheese, etc.  Joanne would rather have all these things go away, rather than focus on the issue of production, as the underlying issue and cause for her is "animal rights",  which aims for the complete and utter cessation of ANY animal use, including for medical purposes (and I don't want to hear any nonsense about "computer models".  Can you imagine being operated on by a surgeon who has only "operated" on a computer?  Are you going to find a cure for AIDS on a computer?)  Joanne is quite aware that she can use "issues" of fur, foie gras, etc, to to play upon people's concern for the environment, to further her cause.  If you're against fur, great, but before you stand up with a placard and decide to stand with a group, do a bit of research yourself,  don't let yourself be spoonfed information, research Liberation BC and animal rights, and see what the REAL cause is.

Dunno if anyone's noticed this or not, but every time someone has an explaination in return to whatever Joanne-ramma-lamma-ding-dong has said, all she does it block it out and tell use that we wear fur underwear and fur t-shirts. Seriously, get a grip and consider the fact that everyone does what they have to do to make the world go 'round. Some people are happy eating lettuce and carrots all day, some animals are too, the rest of us eat what makes us feel satisfied. Some of us also enjoy engaging in intercourse, some of us *notgonnamentionanynamespetaCOUGH* like to take part in intercourse with animals, and some people would rather not involve themselves with it at all.

I dunno, maybe its me, or maybe you really do need to sit down and undergo an intervention, dumb broad.