Advanced search

Fur - yes or no?

(86 Posts)
MrsCampbellBlack Tue 06-Aug-13 14:09:11

Interesting article about fur in September vogue. Seems its becoming popular again and I just wondered what people's views were on here?

Personally I'd wear shearling as not sure that's very different to leather (is it??) but wouldn't wear real fur.

So does anyone wear real fur?

AmandaHoldenmigroin Thu 08-Aug-13 16:12:42

Also live in N. America. The Canada Goose jackets are very popular.

sameoldIggi Thu 08-Aug-13 18:03:33

The species could be culled by the government however. Choosing to dress up in their skins is not the ethical part.

Branleuse Thu 08-Aug-13 18:06:19

I definitely would vintage fur, but i wouldnt buy it new

You cant beat real fur or sheepskin for warmth

No. Absolutely no.

Lanceolate Thu 08-Aug-13 18:14:56

No. Never.

Rooners Thu 08-Aug-13 19:37:03

I still feel uncomfortable about leather and sheepskin and so on. (and meat, dairy etc)

Our society makes it very hard to avoid these things, but very easy to avoid fur.

I would NEVER buy new fur. I have an old coat which has a fur collar, I think it's real but the coat cost £4 in a charity shop many years ago and I decided to keep it as the money went to charity and the animal is long dead. It's no longer supporting the fur trade, if that makes any sense.

I binned a leather coat once in a fit of veganism and tbh it was just a waste really. Poor animal died for nothing, I suppose.

I also have a few fur hats etc that were my grandmother's.

guineapiglet Thu 08-Aug-13 19:46:49

No- never.

If we were living in an arctic or antarctic culture which depended on hunter gathering, fair enough. But we don't.

There are plenty of alternatives so that animals do not have to suffer so we can be warm.

Fur coats belong to the lovely animals created to wear them. Full stop.
The only 'skin' I wear is my lovely thermal Jack Wolfskin coat - an animal's life is not necessary to keep warm. And, who on earth thinks it 'looks' cool - those trying to sell them probably.

sansucre Thu 08-Aug-13 20:26:56

Further to a comment a poster made upthread about leather being a by-product of the beef industry, for the most part, it isn't. In fact, a lot of leather used for clothing, shoes, handbags and gloves isn't a by product of the meat industry at all. Indeed, it's worth noting that kid (baby goat) leather or calf skin is used to make many leather accessories from, and these animals are bred for their hides.

And what about leather upholstery too? Again, the more expensive the product, the chances are the skin will come from an animal that's been bred for its hide.

Most cheap 'fast fashion' brands use something called 'split skin' which is pig skin that's been split in two. It's cheap, nasty and doesn't last. It also comes from animals that haven't been raised well, who have mostly been reared intensively for their meat. On the other hand, the brands who sell accessories and handbags use skis from animals that have been treated well, who have been raised properly and killed with as little harm to the animal as possible. This way, the skins are in better condition, and contain less stress markings. PETA and other such organisations are highly selective with the truth, and it's worth remembering this.)

Oh, and as for 'exotic skins' such as Ostrich, Alligator etc. etc. houses like Louis Vuitton and Hermes (to name just a few) invest heavily in the farms which breed the animals, and the animals are treated well, at great cost, something that is reflected in the price.

And this is why I try not to buy cheap leather goods, particularly those made in China, as I know the animals haven't been treated well. And all I want from an animal I eat, or one I wear is that it's led a well-cared for and happy life.

Anyway, onto fur -

With regards to fur, I'd probably not buy new (mostly because I can't afford to) but I have no issue buying vintage fur. In fact, for me, I'd rather wear real fur than fake fur, which I think its ugly, both to look at and feel. I also don't like the way its made as it uses process and materials that are damaging to the environment, as a poster has mentioned earlier up thread.

To the poster asking about vintage -
I think for clothing, it has to be at least 30+ years old (possibly even more) to considered vintage. (I have to confess that when I spy something a season old from a high street store on ebay listed as vintage, I fall about laughing, because it's not. (I think Patsy in Ab Fab made a joke about how one day, clothing coming back from the dry cleaners will be considered vintage.. I think we're pretty much there.)

EasterHoliday Thu 08-Aug-13 21:57:01

exotics treated well? what like the snakes who are pumped full of water so that they swell like balloons while alive to stretch the skin and can therefore be more carefully flayed, alive, to make the leather more supple? Well cheers LVMH for keeping them in a nice glass case up until that point

Panzee Thu 08-Aug-13 22:16:44

I think vintage has to be older than you. Obviously a moveable feast!

mystaplerisevil Thu 08-Aug-13 22:20:57

fgs no wearing fur makes you look like a twat

why are we reverting back to the 1950 on mn these days?

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now