Fur flaps: Kate Winslet gets real; Angelina Jolie goes faux

I think in light of what is going on in the world around us, this real/fake fur debate is completely inane. Who cares if Kate Winslet posed with a real or fake fur? If she cannot tell the difference herself, how would anybody who looks at the final pictures in the magazine know the difference? Most people are going to assume it's real. And the costume designer's actions in the Jolie movie are equally idiotic. Does this person not have anything better to do than to remove the real fur from vintage clothing and replace it with fake? What is the point? Besides, I thought it was politically correct to wear real fur, as long as it is vintage. It goes to show the absurd nature of the anti-fur doctrine. Did the costumer designer's actions save even one animal? Does it make any difference to any reasonable person? If someone doesn't like real fur, don't wear it. If you like it and can afford it, go for it. This celebrity posturing is positively ridiculous. And really, Kate, who cannot tell the difference between fake and real fur when you're lying naked on the stuff?!

I have been a furrier for almost 15 years and can assure you that the fur in the Changeling photo in this article is 100% real mink fur.

Response to Harriet:

You make my point exactly. I'm willing to bet Jolie's fur is real. These Hollywood celebrities claim to wear fake fur in order to keep animal rights fanatics off of their backs (no pun intended). I'm sure Kate Winslet knew she was posing with real fur as well, but claimed she was fooled after the fact to avoid repercussions. The whole argument is silly and pointless. I've also read that Victoria Beckham wears only fake fur, even though her furs look very real. She supposedly has all the major real fur designs re-made using fake fur. Yeah, right. Anyone who believes this deserves to be deceived. The animal rights loonies are out of bounds. Jennifer Aniston was attacked in internet blogs earlier this year for merely having the gall to walk into an L.A. furrier. (Interestingly, Angelina Jolie was spotted entering this furrier this year as well.) Pamela Anderson verbally accosts anyone she sees wearing real fur. Why is this considered acceptable behavior? I contend that if the pro-life crowd used the same tactics as these anti-fur people, the public would not tolerate it. Can anyone really imagine a pro-life person verbally attacking someone walking out of an abortion clinic? Would this behavior be tolerated? The media would crush this activity immediately and demand criminal charges. Yet, this same action is considered perfectly acceptable merely because someone is wearing fur. Go figure. When did the U.S. become a fascist country anyway?

If you don't understand the notion of animal rights, and don't really care about animals wellfare, well good for you, even though it is sad that millions of animals are victims of selfish behavior (wearing fur, when not necessary)

But please don't you dare judging people who actually care with such rudes and viloent comments. the existence of faux fur just simply proove that it is possible to do fur without killing animals; that's the point. if you don't get it, well sad for you.

a civilized human being should learn to spare animals life when it is possible; that's a way to be gratefull to the animalkind and the greatness they have allowed humanity to reach.

Also, please don't think that having compassion for animals means we don't care about human issues: too easy and convenient for you to think that.

To aron:

So, anybody who disagrees with you "does not care about animals". Maybe in your world that is true, but it is wrong of you to pigeonhole people like that. Some of the kindest, most generous people I know also wear fur--real fur. If this does not make sense to you this represents your shortcoming. In terms of "judging people," it is you animal rights activists who do just that at every drop of the hat. You see someone wearing fur and you immediately start the name-calling and castigating. In fact, I've seen some of the most vile and outrageous comments made against someone merely because they were pictured in fur, even death threats. So spare me your platitudes. What is convenient for you to think is that anyone who does not buy into the animal rights agenda must have something against animals. Yet, some of the closest people to nature are those who hunt and trap and appreciate wildlife for what it is and not some Disney movie fantasy. There are, in fact, good reasons for wearing fur. Hunting and trapping does indeed help control animal populations; without it, more animals would die of disease, starvation and on highways across the world. In fact, fake fur is more harmful to the environment than the real thing. You do not understand this though, because you do not want to understand it. Even your statement of "rude and violent" comments indicates your twisted view of reality. Nobody has said anything "rude" or "violent" in this forum; in fact, your post comes the closest to this description. And, finally, animalkind has not allowed humanity to reach any "greatness". You have that 180 degrees opposite of reality.

Ok, so you suggest that instead of dying of satrvation and deseases animals shoul die skinned alive.

and also that the nature has always been controled by Human activity, and that it has never been able to control itself,

( we are actually responsible of all the natural dysfunctionement.)

The fur industry is also, very polluting (animals needings) and is responsible of the death of millions of animals that are actually farmed (nothing to do with nature regulation), don't you know also that now many real furs are coloured making it also very polluting.

Plus you don't aknowledge that humanity owe so much to the animals (Science, food, clothing, saving people, entertainement...have you ever heard of that?)

well anyway i'm not here to judge anybody and i have also many great friends that sometimes wear fur and we have debates.

I believe in making educated choices.

Your agreessivity speak against you, and I'm only sad that so many people have the talent to excuse anything and are actually the biggest polution on earth.

(forgive my english, I'm french)

I don't believe the sycophantic bleetings from Ms Winslet. You'd have to be a complete moron not to spot the difference between real and faux fur.

If you dont eat it, don't wear it. :)

I also wouldn't condone wearing fur if you had to see what actually happens to those poor animals. The problem with fur obtained in a 'humane' way is that the source of the pelts is very difficult to regulate (exports to many parts of the world).

For this very reason I will not support the fur industry.

If you want to know why, just see for yourself.

Beware! Very graphic!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ueBWi8BL0PQ

fur is rarely taken from animals "trapped", animals are farmed and have a horrendous quality of life before being often inhumanely killed, just so that selfish and ignorant people can wear their skins as "fashion". There is no way to defend it, it is common sense that killing an animal for fashion is wrong.

People just get so uptight about defending themselves for wearing it because they have no defense but pure selfishness and greed.