Comments on: Maybe All That Chlorine Has Gone To Amanda Beard’s Head

By: MadMood

MadMood — Sat, 16 Aug 2008 15:08:05 +0000

There is a group on facebook that has put a twist on the Rather Be Naked campaign. And they include guys in their line up of models.

http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=23553816450&ref=mf

By: The Oversneer

The Oversneer — Tue, 12 Aug 2008 02:55:45 +0000

Actually, I think there is such a thing as “normal.” Feel free to deny it if you wish, but it’s there. I’m not denying that it may change over a few dozen generations, but “normal” is a fact of life. And vegan fashion ain’t it.

By: Juliet

Juliet — Tue, 12 Aug 2008 02:16:11 +0000

I agree that it is hypocrisy, but learning to change ALL of the wardrobe is part of the evolving process. I started out learning slowly about all the terrible things going and so forth. As my intelligence escalated, so did the awareness to change all aspects of my life to become more compassionate. Maybe she hasn’t reached that level of awareness yet? Hopefully she will continue and do more…
On another note, my issue is with the comment, “…(Thank God for that!) She wears animal products just like a regular person…” My reply to that would be…what is regular/normal?
Well, what a stupid comment that was! FYI: I came across this site by pure accident and usually don’t post but had to. I can’t believe I read that because if one has studied psychology, sociology, and cultures…combined it shows that society/each person only has a perception of what is normal according to what environment they formed/developed in to gain a standpoint. What is normal or accepted to one person or culture may not be to another. I am making a point about this because the “regular/normal” insinuation is not accurate. Actually society hasn’t reached an ideal “Normal” yet since it is still so barbaric and uncivilized. It was pretty ignorant and very stupid…who is to say what normal people do? My belief is that once society evolves to become less barbaric/selfish and more civilized with intelligence, then most people would act and actually BEHAVE ethically “Normal”. In today’s society, everyone should challenge themselves to evolve and think outside the box. Intelligent people THINK and analyze what has been fed to them as “Normal” because it can be wrong! Also, intelligent individuals question what is ethically right/selfishly wrong or barbaric towards animals, others, or the environment…deep down most should know unless there are some serious issues at play.

By: Penny

Penny — Mon, 11 Aug 2008 11:30:05 +0000

I applaud Beard for “evolving” instead of following the status quo. So what if she “used to” wear leather or animal boots–she’s changing and learning new values. What’s wrong with that? Most of us did not start out vegan but we learn and grow. Its a difficult path but a worthwhile one. Instead of following the crowd, we think about what we do and try to make informed decisions about what’s right. Its a process.

By: Christina X

Christina X — Mon, 11 Aug 2008 08:00:35 +0000

I don’t quite understand the appeal, either.

By: hot blonde

hot blonde — Mon, 11 Aug 2008 05:16:41 +0000

I love Peta. But then again some call me an extreme vegetarian
Also, was Amanda Beard born a woman?

By: Jess

Jess — Mon, 11 Aug 2008 04:38:33 +0000

Someone’s been watching Bullshit (hint: Sam)
But really, I agree with mostly everyone here. Her view on fur or leather doesn’t matter. It’s the fact that she’s representing an organization that opposes using animal products for fashion, i.e. LEATHER. See the most obvious problem here?

…And on a side note…does her face not look like an old, rotting pumpkin? She looks like a 60 year old with bad plastic surgery. Just sayin…

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Sat, 09 Aug 2008 17:50:43 +0000

Actually, I’m going to back up Amanda a bit on this one.
She was specifically saying she’s against the slaughtering of animals FOR FASHION. Most leather sandals and shoes aren’t that bad (most are made from cow, and as a result, are a byproduct for making hamburgers and such), and food is a completely legitimate reason to kill animals. Even animals to do that one.

Further, she’d right about leather doing a better job of protecting you from a bad spill. I know I’ve taken a few tumbles myself. In choosing human safety vs animal safety, the human should generally win out. (And again, leather is often a byproduct of a process of making food).

If anything, I think Amanda is being a bit more responsible than a large number of PETA members. (Many who are which… “Fuzzy things must never die!” while Amanda is more in the direction of moderation). And as others have mentioned, going naked isn’t that big of a deal for her.

On top of that, I fully support nudity in the Olympics. After all, when the Olympics were first created, being in the buff was effectively a requirement (as well as oiling yourself down to help you move that extra bit faster, those sneaky Greeks).

By: Christina X

Christina X — Fri, 08 Aug 2008 05:01:34 +0000

But this statement isn’t legitimate, because until all clothes are made from fur or animal byproducts, it’s unnecessary to go naked.

Ask any of these skanks to pose for an advertisement that says “I’d rather wear a burlap potato sack than wear fur”, and see how many of them would actually incline to it. I bet none of them would.

Second of all, there’s a difference between being vegan and being anti-fur, but PETA’s official stance is overall veganism: no meat, no fur, no animal testing, no owning pets, etc. The reason why everyone heckles PETA for the “I’d rather go naked than wear fur” campaign is because these women, aside from wearing fur, has pretty much gone against nearly everything else that PETA stands for. For such a radical organization, PETA is most certainly a fickle one at that.

By: SweetCandy

SweetCandy — Thu, 07 Aug 2008 15:02:47 +0000

Hey there Spock,

You are half right. The cows that are slaughtered for their meat are also used for their leather. However, that is a lower grade leather. The high end stuff comes from a different kind of cow farm. Where they may still sell the meat, the prime income comes from the leather. Cows raised for leather are treated a lot differently than cows raised for food. For example, leather cows are raised in somewhat (not completely though) better conditions. Just in the fact that their skin has to be untouched because every scar, sore or blemish on the hide is a loss in value for the farmer. The cow in your sandwhich is not likely to be the cow in your $600 shoes.