Lady Gaga, Beyonce, and other Celebrities That Wear Fur Fashion
In recent celebrity-related news, Lady Gaga has become yet another celebrity out of a handful seen wearing fur fashion and who has been targeted by the animal rights group PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals) as a result.
Her response? Some wonky, defensive reply about being against bullying or something.
Let’s be clear on the fact that I do not support PETA and other similar animal rights groups like the Humane Society of the United States. I’m a strong believer in consumer freedom and the right of an individual to make choices outside of another person or group's opinionated emotional sentiment. With that being said, fur fashion production is one of the most vicious, egomaniacal, and ethically repugnant industries carried out in this country that is somewhat accepted by our civilized society. It is an aberration of what should be considered basic moral decency. It really shocks me that any debate remains about this subject. It simply shouldn’t be occurring.
Fur and Biological Imperatives
But first, it is necessary to debunk once and for all the inane myth that fur-wearing is comparable to the consumption of animal-based foods.
Allow me to illustrate some perspective without suggesting any definiteness, as I won’t bother dragging a debate over why I personally think animal-based foods are a healthy choice for most people.
What many individuals in the vegan/vegetarian movement seek to ignore is the stone fact that humans (Homo sapiens) evolved consuming meat nutrition throughout the dawn of their existence. The dispute over whether or not people ‘need’ to consume meat or benefit from it permanently remains in a tedious state of dissension, along with the many biased correlation studies, wishful-thinking alternative theories, and emotional commitment perpetuated by special interest groups that exist on both sides of the controversy. I’ve shuffled through many nutritional theories and was only able to deduct one consistent fact: different dietary lifestyles work for different individuals.
List of celebrities who wear/have worn fur
- Mary J. Blige
- Kim Kardashian
- Lady Gaga
- Aretha Franklin
- Amber Rose
- Kanye West
- Pattie Labelle
- Jennifer Lopez
- Joan Rivers
- Paris Hilton
No one has to concur with my nutritional views, but let’s just entertain the idea that ‘perhaps’ some people cannot absorb, utilize, or efficiently convert nutrients from some sources of food as efficiently as another person may be able to. It should also be considered that the human brain, which is the defining factor that separates humans from many other animals, is composed of cholesterol and fats, and an alteration in the diet may or may not have an impact on how efficiently it works. Pre-natal development may also be impacted by a diet restricting certain fats.
This is also disregarding that not every person is as committed, or aware enough to research and compose a nutritionally complete diet when restricting animal fats. Therefore, these decisions should be up to the person, and not another person’s code of ethics. If a food source is whole and natural, what right does one person have to insist to another that their diet is unacceptable and should be amended? Simply put, people should have the natural right to make whole food decisions that they are comfortable with, just as they have done for thousands of years. Eating is applicable to a person's quality of life. What are the ramifications of abstaining from buying fur?
Unless you own a fur farm, none. There is a clear and obvious biological incentive to consume meat, and that is the case for almost any other omnivorous animal. No supposed nutritional study is going to erase this fact.
Animal rights supporters may think they see an opportunity to insert their animal liberation ideology when people fret over the subject of animals being killed for trivial fashion, but they are kidding themselves.
The idea that fur-wearing is as much of a choice and is no worse than consuming animal-based products is a dangerous mentality for animals, and serves to hinder our progress in creating reasonable welfare standards for the animals we incorporate into our lives.
Mary J.Blige sheds many tears over God-knows-what in her overwrought music videos, than gleefully poses with fur from multiple animals, firing back at her critiques with this statement:
"Those PETA people don't want to mess with me, they don't want to throw paint on my coat because it's not just going to be throwing paint. It's going to be Mary in the news the next day, you know what I mean? "What gives them the right to destroy someone's coat because their opinion is that you shouldn't wear animals? Understand what I'm saying?"
The epitome of fakery and deception.
Fur should NOT be acceptable
Fur is a frivolous aspect of our modern culture; a mere fabric of the fashion industry. What’s worse, it is an approbation of the human desire to appreciate what is superficial, paltry and classist. Much of fur’s appeal is in the egocentric qualities that displaying it on oneself possesses. Fur screams, ‘look how many expensive animals were raised and killed just so I can wear them’. How else would one explain that while the current trendy aesthetic favors form-fitting clothing, many of these coats resemble a blanket draped over the wearers’ shoulders, suggesting a sort of ‘medieval appeal’. Common-place in perhaps an age where animals and even humans were subjected to massive amounts of rights and welfare violations, this mindset should be frowned upon today.
A friend once told me when I outlined why fur-wearing/support is not unlike supporting animal cruelty and neglect, that well, so many people do it. How can you condemn people for wearing it when it is so common? This is how fur acceptance prevails and is not seen as how it should be.
It is poignantly contemptible that anyone would allow a single animal to die for such a purpose. This is of course without touching on how terribly animals raised for fur live before they are ‘dispatched’ through neck-breaking, beating, anal electrocution, and the ever so popularly claimed ‘skinned alive’, which, for the sake of my own sanity, I will assume doesn’t happen often or purposely.
Another issue not considered is that many fur-bearing animals used in this severely under regulated industry are more demanding and cannot be humanely ‘farmed’ (this is something I have enhanced knowledge of from keeping an exotic). Agricultural animals such as cows, chickens, bison, and sheep ideally should be raised free-range, and/or should be feeding on hay in roomy sheltered pens. Predacious animals that are commonly farmed for fur, such as mink and foxes, cannot be confined to such conditions without it being detrimental to their well-being. Carnivores are active hunters. Stereotypical behavior is common and evident among confined predators, as they are provided with zero enrichment and not enough room for them to take 2 steps without meeting a wall. How can we expect to even begin to address the (equally important) conflicts with the agricultural industry when we still have torturous and incredibly unnecessary practices like fur production occurring?
It should be understood that if we can justify death, let alone torture of animals solely for adding another frivolous fashion choice (among many, including faux fur) to those with disposable incomes, we cannot rule away a person’s ‘choice’ to fight dogs,create and distribute “Crush” fetish videos, poach elephants for ivory, or pleasure hunt animals with no intention of eating the meat. In Lady Gaga’s case, “art” is what inspired her to forfeit a basic principle of moral decency. Whether or not her coat was real, her denial to comment on the subject is just empowering her followers to ignore the horrors of such a decision. People who are indifferent to fur wearing are on par with Michael Vick supporters, in my opinion.
Why Pick on Celebrities? They Are Influential.
Many of these celebrities have piles of followers. Gaga specifically, lauds her efforts with anti-bullying campaigns and support of gay rights. It baffles me that they can flash their fake smiles, allege to be reasonable human begins and be celebrated by unthinking people as model citizens while they can’t even bring themselves to skip a near sadistic choice of fashion. It is behavior that would be expected from some sociopaths and people with certain forms of anti-social personality disorder (which in all honesty is why the fur-wearing committed by people like Kanye West and 50 Cent to me, is unsurprising), but for celebrities that masquerade as caring individuals with human values, it is entirely unacceptable behavior and, in the broad scheme, is just one of the most senseless crimes one can commit against animals because it is so simple to just not purchase or market clothes that use real fur. It's pathetic that I have to struggle to be able to maintain my right to keep pets that are not domesticated, while praised celebrities like Beyonce and Lady Gaga are unquestioned by their devoted fan base. It is perplexing and stress-inducing how backwards our priorities are. These 'artists' need to abandon this display of lack of morals so I can go back to hating them solely for being worshiped despite lack of talent.
This is NOT a subject only reserved for animal rights radicals, and this is what groups like PETA accomplish with their inanity. If only these groups could recognize the damage they cause when they convince people that this issue is a facet of the animal rights movement.
More by this Author
An analysis of the trailer for the documentary Blackfish and the commentary presented about Seaworld and the captivity of orca whales.
Pets and zoo animals as slaves or prisoners? Projecting the human emotional state upon animals is not necessarily in line with optimal animal welfare.
Profiles of the small and medium-sized exotic or wild cats that are sometimes kept as pets in the United States.