[Raleigh]

Originally Posted by Gedatsu

To Demure - In no way did I indicate anyone was approving of child labor exploitation. To infer so shows an extreme failure in general logic and understanding.

Huh? You obviously did not get my point. You were complaining about child labour involved with synthetic fur and I was pointing out that child labour is not only linked with synthetic fur trade. So you are obviously the one not getting the point, at all so do not be rude.

I ask that you admit that any site against such a thing would choose the worst of the worst, the cruelest of the cruel to make their point whereas you might have a hard time finding any sort of zealous website about the humane treatment of animals in some facilities.

That doesn't justify anything, these actions are still being done in many countries, especially since fur trade is highly unregulated in many developing countries so the animals are still sufferring cruelty.

Also, please look into such things as pig farming, chicken farming, and calf-raising...

Did I ever say I supported these? I don't eat meat and I am aware of other activities which are cruel to animals and I do not support them. However the case we are discussing is fur trade and not farming, pollution or global warming. You cannot justify a bad action with another action which is just as bad. Also I was mentioning the point that they weren't killed since you were discussing the case that "they are going to be killed anyhow" so do not take it out of context.

I'm just saying that there CAN be a middle ground - you don't need to be ZOMGNOFURZ4EVA or KILLDATANIMALZnTAKEITZFURZ, you can still think that wearing real fur is acceptable as long as it was obtained through humane means.

Do we look like crazed anti-fur trade people? As Impact said most fur coats get purchased by rich people and not commoners which only use it once and we are mentioning how this doesn't justify the death of all those animals. That's all. There are worse things but we are talking ONLY about freaking fur trade and nothing else.

These farms are controlled just as tightly (if not more,because the anti fur movement people are constantly watching them too) as the farms of other domesticated animals, so there isn't any difference.

That's only in some nations which are aware of fur trade and it's cruelty and rightly so. In many other countries fur trade is unregulated so the animals do actually suffer. C'mon do you seriously believe that they are being regulated in Africa or Asia? There is a difference you fail to see: fur is something frivolious, food is neccessary, otherwise we die. Would you rather own a fur coat and die of hunger?

I'm against cruel farming, but not fur farming that is as humane as other farming. You're making it sound like all fur trade is cruel, or rather the nature of fur trade is cruel, and that's not true.

To a point it is cruel because you are killing loads of animals for something which is frivolious and can easily be replaced. These animals are not domestic animals. Most domestic animals have been protected by men for years and used to being protected by humans and have little chance to survive in the wild. However wild animals have instincts and also require a bigger space than those tiny cages they are put in. These wild animals might be treated well, in some farms but they still suffer psychological problems and are not happy to live in a tiny cage since it is not their natural enviroment and they have not adapted to human environment like dogs and cats have done.

Like mentioned earlier in this thread, no serious fashion haouse would use threatened animals in their products. Usually the animals are farmed in their native country or native environment, like crocodile and alligators.

Are you kidding? Most of them have no clue what a "threatened species" is let alone care unless people start speaking up. Their aim is provide fashion and get loads of profit. And why do you think there's so much illegal hunting of rare animals such as tigers and seals? Canada has in vain tried to slow down harp seal hunting but the hunters think of their pockets rather than saving "threatened species". Obviously rare fur is still a very profitable fashion material. Most women would rather but the rarest and most expensive coat to flaunt their power.

It's only in the past few years that fashion is finally getting aware of this and they are providing fur-free fashion shows. However there's still a long way to go. Also no they are not usually farmed in their environment. I never considered a cage as a natural environment as most fur comes from caged animals.

Allthought I couldn't care less about hunting myself and I think it's horrible, if banned a lot of animals would probably catch diseases and starve as there would be too many of them.

Wow then I wonder how all animals and fish did not catch diseases and starve before humans started mass hunting? If you research well the food web is well designed to have a stable system. Natural predators exist to keep down the number of animals so they wouldn't "starve". Also the predators and largest animals have less cubs so that they would not eat every single animal alive.

And this makes is...? Worse? better? Cats and dogs have any more value than mink? I was not aware...

You misunderstood my point. I am showing how hypocritical some people are by calling their doggies their "best friends" and then go wearing their own fur on them.

Yeah, I think it's important to remember that PETA/Fur is dead is one of many sources of material and it's just as important to be critical on taking in that as taking in any other information.

Yeah but they are providing us with the horrible truth that so many fur companies are so conveniently hiding. Also I suggest reading here and here to see that a percentage of the fur trade doesn't give a fig about humane treatment or threatened species. Guardian are independent journalists and rarely side with any part.