No more Bling!

[Crumb]

Originally Posted by xouper

http://gemini.tntech.edu/~bstansberry/antivegan.html

This is really funny xouper.

[xouper]

Crumb: This is really funny xouper.

I was hoping that story might introduce some levity.

xishi: i was not aware of directing my moral outrage in your direction...

OK, perhaps you are not aware of the effect of your words, then, but when you characterize pearls as a symbol of greed and vanity (not to mention cruelty to clams), that certainly seems like you are expressing your moral outrage. If that was not your intent, then may I suggest that you reconsider painting people with a negative moral brush the way you did.

xishi: ...and as for not being surprised at your reciprocating...is this some type of threat...

Yes it is. I do not always sit still when a vegetarian thumbs their moral nose at me. If you are not doing that, then we shall not have a problem.

[xouper]

xishi: ...and as for not being surprised at your reciprocating...is this some type of threat...

xouper: Yes it is. I do not always sit still when a vegetarian thumbs their moral nose at me. If you are not doing that, then we shall not have a problem.

That came out harsher than I meant. What I meant was that if yer gonna thumb your moral nose at me, don't be surprised if I choose to thumb it right back atcha.

[xishi]

this may be a case of your perception rather than my intent...i do not usually thumb my nose at people..very graceless..but what i intuit is that you have some sensitivity towards vegetarians..i have never ever tried to convince people that vegeterianism is superior...it is just my choice

[xouper]

xishi: ... what i intuit is that you have some sensitivity towards vegetarians..

I have some sensitivity to vegetarians who feel the need to express moral superiority. I am glad to hear that you aren't one of them. I assume then that you retract your comment about feeling disgust if you were to see me wearing "bits of pink and purple fur on [my] oh so trendy outfits".

[xishi]

no you can't assume that..to kill an animal frivolously for adornment is awful to me...


besides i intuit that pink and purple may not be your best colors

[xouper]

xishi: no you can't assume that..to kill an animal frivolously for adornment is awful to me...

Are you saying that if you see me wearing dyed fur you automatically assume it was from an animal killed frivolously for my adornment? If so, then may I ask, on what basis do you justify those two assumptions?

[Corona688]

that pink and purple fur, so horrible... do you have any idea how many barneys it takes to make one purple fur sash? Someone please, think of the children!

(seriously, do people actually dye real fur? sound more like faux fur to me. won't someone think of the fauxes?)

[livius drusus]

People definitely dye real fur. It's hugely in for this season, too. ( @ fauxes)

[xishi]

Originally Posted by Corona688

that pink and purple fur, so horrible... do you have any idea how many barneys it takes to make one purple fur sash? Someone please, think of the children!

(seriously, do people actually dye real fur? sound more like faux fur to me. won't someone think of the fauxes?)

yes they do...you see it in vogue from the finest designers and then it is copied down...my girlfriend was telling about her birthday presents and mentioned a designer sweater and says...you won't like it...i immediately got it...it has fur on it...i have lots of beautiful clothes but find no need for fur trim...think of the poor fauxes..that is funny...and you make my point faux fur works fine...if you want to be furry

[xishi]

Originally Posted by xouper

Are you saying that if you see me wearing dyed fur you automatically assume it was from an animal killed frivolously for my adornment? If so, then may I ask, on what basis do you justify those two assumptions?

the fact that you are wearing it...i am not arguing the point further..you can call yourself the winner in this debate if you like....also i am so dense i only see one assumption in your argument...you win i lose and so does the animal..go pick on someone else for a bit...ok

[LadyShea]

I wear vintage furs, mostly from the 40's and 50's. Do you also consider this "awful"?

[livius drusus]

I think the point some here might be trying to make is that you can't know just from looking at an outfit or a jewel whether it involved an animal killed frivolously for adornment.

LadyShea noted the case of heirloom or vintage furs; Corona underscored that you might very well not be able to tell if a fur trim is faux or not; xouper pointed out that characterizing people's ownership of animal accessories -- pearls or fur or what have you -- as motivated by greed and vanity is painting with a broad moral brush which may very well be entirely inaccurate.

I have strands of pearls from both my grandmothers. I wear them rarely, but when I do it's in memory of them, out of respect for something they held dear. I also have a fur stole from one of my grandmothers and a fur cape my mother had made out of a coat which had worn out from use.

These are beautiful, precious things to me. I respect the animals who created them; I love and respect the people which whom I associate them. Vanity is a distant and minor factor. Greed doesn't enter into it at all.

Incidentally, a small correction: pearls can be harvested without killing the oyster.

[godfry n. glad]

First, a small niggle....

Angora rabbits can be shaved, but it is not the recommended means of obtaining the fiber. Ideal Angora fur is obtained by plucking or brushing the rabbit. Not only do they like it, they tend to go nearly limp when plucking or brushing or combing out loose fur (they "shed" four times a year).

Shaving reduces the fiber's ability to meld with other fibers and makes it more difficult for the fur to be spun.

(And just how do I know this? My darling wife was a knitter extraordinaire and spinner to boot. We owned a series of Angora bunnies because she was learning and experimenting.... She couldn't stand to see them cooped up all the time, so she spent more time cleaning and grooming and threw more fiber away, but she got a bunny with a lot more personality.)

Second, if everybody is so concerned about the fauxes, why don't I hear any complaints about the number of naugas that are slaughtered every year for their hydes?

[lisarea]

Thank you, godfry. I did not know that. Angora makes me sneeze, so I'm not generally a fan myself. (I actually unravelled an angora sweater a while ago to make a scarf out of it. I could only do it a little at a time because I'd be sneezing and my eyes would tear until I couldn't see what I was doing, and it took me a disturbingly long time to get around to asking myself "Why?" I mean, it's not like I could wear it when I was done or anything.)

Anyway, on the overall vanity/exploitation thing, I think it's really a matter of understanding that different people have different priorities. Everyone picks their battles. Is it vain to exploit an oyster or a cow or a goat or a rabbit or a musk ox or a human being so you can feel pretty or impress others? Yeah, probably. Is it lazy to fail to thoroughly research every consumer good you purchase and weigh the significance of its impact on the environment to ensure that it has caused the least amount of damage possible? Yeah, probably that too. Everyone has an impact on the world around them, though. And it's fairly safe to assume that anyone who's arguing about it on the internet is living in an industrialized society, and is pretty unlikely to be intimately familiar with the means of production employed for things they use. It's also fairly safe to assume that anyone who would bother to argue about it on the internet has some personal priorities for themselves, and that they are, in some way, doing what they can to minimize their impact, do the right thing when and where they can.

It's simplistic to argue, then, that there's one way to determine whether someone is irresponsible and insufferably vain. Do they eat meat? Do they wear pearls or furs or leather or gemstones? Virtually any metal or gemstone is likely to be a product of the exploitation of human miners somewhere, so the 'blood diamonds' argument is overly simplistic too. There are plenty of blood sapphires and blood rubies out there, too. And there are even alternatives in the diamond industry as well. There are Canadian diamonds, and even manufactured diamonds coming into the market as well.

Any food product you eat, animal based or not, is likely produced in some manner as to kill or injure someone or something somewhere along its production chain. Fluffy woodland creatures are mangled by the threshers that harvest oats and wheat. Rice paddies, in many places, particularly within the US, are created artificially, by flooding large areas of land, thus displacing native wildlife, increasing methane and subsequently increasing global warming, increasing mosquito populations and subsequently propagating things like West Nile virus, decimating bird populations.

Anything you use is fairly likely to be hurting something, somewhere. Is your cotton harvested ethically? Are your clothes made in sweatshops? Are your petroleum based leather substitutes sending great big billows of carcinogenics out into schoolyards, nature preserves, and waterways? Are you contributing to the depletion of the atmosphere and limited fuel supplies by ordering things over the internet and having them delivered discretely, rather than using the more efficient methods of transport afforded by the distribution methods employed by big box store chains like WalMart?

Yeah, probably.

Can you avoid having some detrimental effect on other lives? No. Probably not. Again, particularly if you live in an industrialized society, you don't know where your consumer products come from. You don't control that. And even if you do manage to live completely off the grid (which, if you are arguing about it on the internet, you don't), you still have a footprint. Maybe you have farting livestock sending methane up into the atmosphere, maybe you're destroying native flora and fauna with your vegetable garden. Maybe you're just taking up too much space to justify the decreased demand for products in the production chain (actually, very probably that). Like the means of production or not, centralized manufacturing and production methods are probably, in the long run, more economical than maintaining a society full of completely self-sufficient households.

Is it vain to wear jewelry or furs or whatever? Yeah, probably, if you want to be all pejorative and judgemental about it. It's also vain to replace your jeans with holes in them, vain to get new glasses frames. It's vain to wash your hair and your body with detergents every day. It's vain to wear any kind of makeup, perfumes, hair products, or other cosmetics. It's all killing something, somewhere.

Maybe the damage you're causing is somewhat less obvious, slightly less direct, than being able to say "This product is made directly from an animal," but there's something just a little self-indulgent and almost a little corporate about absolving yourself of responsibility just because you've managed to distance yourself from the cruelty done in your name.

We all have some negative impact. We are all responsible for some cruelty, some injury, some death. It's unavoidable. And we all (or at least most of us) try to do something to minimize, mitigate, or atone for that. But just because you may have chosen one route doesn't mean that everyone has to choose that route as well. We all have different priorities, and we all have to pick our battles. So just because someone hasn't picked the same battle you have doesn't mean that they're not fighting something else that needs fought.

Sorry for the tangent. Sometimes, buttons I didn't even know I had get pushed.

[xishi]

Originally Posted by LadyShea

I wear vintage furs, mostly from the 40's and 50's. Do you also consider this "awful"?

i would not do it myself...but seems less so as it has little influence on current state of affairs...i love vintage myself...i have a fake fur coat from the sixties that looks like a 30's movie star coat..living in south florida i get to wear it maybe twice a year...i prefer velvet...also please note that said it was awful to me...that is an opinion not a moral outrage...i also may not like peanut butter but it is only my opinion...have no problem with those who love peanut butter

[viscousmemories]

Originally Posted by lisarea

Damn fine post, lisarea.

[Beth]

Originally Posted by viscousmemories

Damn fine post, lisarea.

I agree.

[Crumb]

Originally Posted by Beth

I agree.

[xishi]

ok..there are a number of valid points you make...heirloom pearls cherished for their sentimental value...i can tell faux fur from real..did not know pearls could be harvested without killing oyster..wonder if that is what is actually done...where i was coming from is going into the gap or other such stores and seeing items triimmed with real fur and people blithely wearing them because they are the newest in things...i said it disturbs me...i did not tell anyone to stop...i also do not watch or own a television but do not try to convince anyone to give up theirs...ghandi said you can tell the level of evolvement of a culture from the way they treat animals...animals are horribly abused in many ways...it hurts my heart...and i agree it was a fine post

[livius drusus]

Originally Posted by xishi

.i can tell faux from real..

At a glance, though? I can tell faux from real if I've got my hands on it, but it's not always so clear when you just see someone wearing a fur collar on the street or something.

did not know pearls could be harvested without killing oyster..wonder if that is what is actually done...

With cultured pearls it is definitely done. The pearls are harvested and then the next batch is implanted in the oysters. I doubt the industry could afford to kill their producers at every harvest.

Natural pearls I'm not sure about, but I would imagine any commercial enterprise would in fact kill the oysters, possibly grinding up their shells for sale as well (they're used in a variety of capacities, including as seeds for cultured pearls).

where i was coming from is going into the gap or other such stores and seeing items triimmed with real fur and people blithely wearing them because they are the newest in things...i said it disturbs me...i did not tell anyone to stop...

Mass-production disturbs me as well, and as an animal-lover, I am always saddened to see the products of animal death. I suppose in the end I go with the position lisarea's post articulated so well: we each draw the line in different places and do different things to interact in this world with our moral standards. From what you've written here it seems you agree as well and try your best to do what you feel you have to do.

ghandi said you can tell the level of evolvement of a culture from the way they treat animals...animals are horribly abused in many ways...it hurts my heart

I understand and agree. There are some real horrors out there. Of course, Ghandi treated women very badly indeed and he didn't seem to think that reflected poorly on the evolution of his culture. We all do the best we can, ya know?

[xishi]

yes i agree we all do our best...and we all do unintentional harm too...to lighten things up here is a little ex...i live in south florida...i have very light skin...sunblock is nesessary...found this face powder with spf 30...was perfect...so now i have to call company to find out policies re animal testing...happy to report that they do not test on animals so i can use my powder...

[godfry n. glad]

Originally Posted by viscousmemories

Damn fine post, lisarea.

I'll agree, as well. I do think that there is one consideration not addressed, though. The one thing I ask is that because one must do so is not license to do so profligately, wantonly or wastefully. That we must eat and obtain appropriate nutrients is reason to kill bison, but insufficent to kill and eat only the tongue (as was done by railroad hunters in the late 19th century in North America). We, as humans, are part of nature, not in control of nature. It seem to me that we, as a species, often assume things that are pleasurable for us short-term, but damaging in the long-term. This is a real problem with classical economics, because, as John Maynard Keynes ruefully pointed out, "We all live in the short run."

For the record, I'm an omnivore. I think of it as misguided, particularly for the female of the species, who is almost always in need of additional iron in her diet. Additionally, does not the continued presence of canine teeth in the human animal indicate at least a partial reliance upon tearing meat as part of the diet? Domestic animals have been a boon to humanity as a energy storage system in locales which don't produce root, cereal or other sustaining crops year 'round. They have also, from my understanding, been the largest and most sustaining source of bacterial and viral infections.

I recoil at the manner in which many of the animals we keep for meat and other foodstuffs have come to be cared for, cooped up unnaturally for any animal. I do not know enough about the fur industry to speak knowledgeably about it, but it seems as a means of outer protective clothing, it's been longstanding in human experience. It is a struggle between predators, and we are one of the predators.

[lisarea]

Originally Posted by xishi

ok..there are a number of valid points you make...heirloom pearls cherished for their sentimental value...i can tell faux fur from real..did not know pearls could be harvested without killing oyster..wonder if that is what is actually done...where i was coming from is going into the gap or other such stores and seeing items triimmed with real fur and people blithely wearing them because they are the newest in things...i said it disturbs me...i did not tell anyone to stop...i also do not watch or own a television but do not try to convince anyone to give up theirs...ghandi said you can tell the level of evolvement of a culture from the way they treat animals...animals are horribly abused in many ways...it hurts my heart...and i agree it was a fine post

What, though, does the way a culture treats human beings say about it?

I mean, it's easy to pinpoint the suffering involved in the production of leather or meat or other animal products. But what about the economic suffering involved in the production of a loaf of bread* or a paperclip produced by Chinese prison labor? Which is greater? Which has more impact? Is it crueller to kill an animal for its hide or to exploit third-world peasants, allowing wealthy international capitalists to control their access to education, clean air, potable water, even their basic freedom? I mean, is it crueller to wear a jacket made from cowhide produced in an OSHA-compliant facility in the US, or to wear a cotton jacket produced in some third-world sweatshop, where the native populations are jailed, even killed, by militia actions prescribed by bizarre secretive loan agreements that dictate violent police action in response to civilian protest?

Ghandi lived in a simpler time.

I'm just saying that we're all culpable. We're all cruel. We're all vain. Society is a big stinking death machine, and you cannot avoid participating. All you can do is limit your impact in some ways. But we're all probably hypocrites at some point. We all contribute to shit we don't want to contribute to. Anyone who can manage to live their lives wholly and completely in adherence to their principles at all times probably doesn't have enough principles.

* There is a very large, and very secretive grain cartel that largely controls the prices, production, and distribution of grain products the world over. Bizarre sidenote: One of the major players in said grain cartel is LuisDreyfus, to which the actor Julia Luis-Dreyfus is an heir. Massive fortune there, all profiting from the misery of probably millions. And Elaine from Seinfeld will probably control a great deal of it when Daddy dies. I don't have a point in mentioning that, except it's kind of freaky.

[xishi]

oh yes... i agree on your point about the exploitation of people as cheap labor...and yes i am also culpable...i order something pretty from a catalog...receive it...label says made in china...it's like you can't win but you definitely lose if you don't try...