Debating Ethics: Is Donning Fur Justifiable in Any Circumstance?
In the world of fashion, a new trend has emerged, the 'mob wife' aesthetic, characterized by heavy gold jewelry, big blow-drys, and lavish fur pieces. This trend has brought about a renewed focus on fur fashion, which has seen a resurgence recently.
However, the debate about the ethics of wearing fur has been reignited, especially with the availability of vintage and secondhand fur clothes. Many luxury brands, such as Gucci, have gone pelt-free in recent years, but the decision to buy a vintage fur coat ultimately lies with the consumer.
Wearing secondhand fur coats is often regarded as a more ethical and sustainable compromise than buying new fur. This is primarily because it avoids supporting the current fur industry and reduces waste by reusing existing materials. Purchasing vintage or secondhand fur gives new life to garments made in the past, preventing additional harm to animals and preventing further production impacts.
Key ethical considerations include reducing demand for new fur, sustainability and waste reduction, animal welfare concerns, and the availability of alternatives. Buying secondhand does not encourage fur farming or trapping, which involve significant animal welfare concerns linked to confinement, cruelty, and environmental harm. Reusing vintage fur minimizes resource use and pollution associated with producing new fur garments.
However, even with secondhand fur, critics argue that wearing any animal fur perpetuates cultural acceptance of fur as fashion and can be seen as endorsing the past suffering involved. Faux fur and other animal-free luxury materials provide cruelty-free and eco-friendly substitutes without ethical controversy.
PETA Deutschland, an animal rights organisation, advises against wearing fur, whether secondhand or new, stating that it suggests it's okay to wear the dead skin of a tortured animal. They recommend donating pelt pieces to those in need, but only after ensuring they can never enter the market again, such as by spraying a big 'X' across the piece.
On the other hand, some argue that wearing vintage real fur is no worse than wearing vintage leather shoes or accessories, because the damage is already done. However, Vasiliki Voulgari, the owner of VV Vintage, suggests that synthetic alternatives are a better option, as no animals suffer in their production.
The rise in numbers of vegetarians and vegans suggests a collective change of heart regarding the ethics of eating meat and wearing animal products. Thrifting has become popular among young people, offering a way to save the environment and money. Germany has seen a significant decrease in the value of imported clothing and accessories made from fur between 2011 and 2021.
"Thrift Shop," the 2012 song by Macklemore, is more of an anthem for thrifty millennials now than it was over a decade ago. Marita Makasch, the owner of OFT Vintage, suggests that inherited fur pieces and those found in Berlin flea markets and vintage shops should be worn instead of discarded.
In summary, while many animal rights advocates oppose any use of animal fur, wearing secondhand fur is often regarded as a more ethical and sustainable compromise than buying new fur. However, the ethical acceptance depends on one’s personal values regarding animal rights, environmental sustainability, and fashion ethics.
The debate about fur fashion has expanded to include secondhand fur, with many viewing it as a more ethical and sustainable choice as it reduces demand for new fur and minimizes potential animal suffering. On the contrary, some argue that wearing vintage real fur is comparable to wearing vintage leather, but synthetic alternatives, such as those offered by Vasiliki Voulgari, are preferred because no animals are harmed in their production. The rise in vegetarianism and veganism, alongside the popularity of thrift shopping, suggests a growing concern for environmental sustainability and animal welfare in fashion and lifestyle choices.
