Today at a Barnes & Noble bookstore in New York City, Ashley and Mary-Kate Olsen had a book signing for their new coffee table volume, titled Influence. (Racked has the list of “rules” handed out to more than 2,000 autograph-seekers. It’s entertaining.)
And outside, a bunch of animal rights protesters from PETA dressed up in scary Halloween masks to protest the Olsen twins.
Why? Because they use fur in their clothing designs. (Even more entertaining.)
Pop quiz: Where could you actually find a fur-trimmed garment? Inside at the book signing? Or outside in the protest zone? (Don’t answer too quickly.)
At right is a shot of the twins in the bookstore. Leather pants? Check. Suede shoes? Check. But no fur.
And here’s the scene outside:
Whaaa? Let’s zoom in on that third protester from the right…
Nice trim. I don’t even care if it’s “fake” fur. If you’re running with PETA, making sure people know you’re holier-than-thou should be Job One. Point goes to the Olsens (and normal people everywhere).
My philosophy about fake fur is the same as my thinking about fake boobs. If they look real, they’re real enough.
The last word goes to FashionIndie:
The next time PETA gathers to protest, I think they should tell their supporters to avoid wearing fake fur…it just isn’t getting the anti-fur message across. Sorry PETA, you may have started this war, but it looks like you lost your first battle. Fur is fur and fur is fashion. You’ve got other issues to worry about…like the meat purse…
Related posts:
- Pamela Anderson Must Wear a Disguise at Nordstrom Isn’t Pamela Anderson just so talented and amazing? In an...
- Yes We Can…Wear Fur! Even if you know nothing about PETA, you know that...
- Bethenny Frankel Would Rather Eat Veal Than Wear Fur UPDATE: Page Six is on the case, and the other...
- PETA Protests Jay Leno Over McDonald’s Sponsorship PETA is just aghast that “The Jay Leno Show” has...
Are those meth scabs on the forehead of the Trollsen masks?
Hahaha that’s classic!! I think the crime here is the grey shoes! They look huge on the girl (don’t know who is who and don’t really care)
I came to this from clicking an advertisement, and don’t really pay much attention at all to celebrities or PETA. From this article, I didn’t know whether the Olsen twins used fake fur or not. But a little bit of googling found me my answer – they do and they are posterchildren for the fir industry according to this source [spam link deleted -ed.]. Also, I’m a bit surprised – I don’t see the Olsen Twins very often, but it looks like they progressively get uglier and uglier as they get older. They were so cute on Full House. I remember some people had “Legal Age” countdown websites for them, lol.
But I must say this blog entry seems a bit biased against the PETA protestors. Sure it may be slightly amusing, but their purpose is to fight against animal abuse – not fashionable clothing. This reminds me of a UK judge who sent an artist to jail for making very realistic pornography. Because, get this – the art looked like the subjects were under 18! I mean, the whole legal justification against child porn is because it “always hurts the child being depicted”. Parents have even gone to jail because of this questionable justification because their girl takes photos of herself without their knowledge!
And so here we go again, bashing people for having something that looks similar to something else that (might have) got hurt. I suggest you save the “OMG PETA PROTESTOR WEARING FAKE FUR! LOL!” for 4chan.
What I would like to see is something along the lines of how PETA will protest fur-wearers by throwing red paint on them, but this time directed at PETA members themselves and with real animal blood instead of paint.
God, but that would be a riot. Someone throwing real animal blood on some PETA douchebags….
Or maybe some rancid hamburger meat. Or maybe some animal entrails. Or, hell, just some roadkill you find on the side of the road.
I’m completely serious. I would seriously laugh my ass off if someone turned the tables on those PETA bastards, but used some real animal parts instead.
vince, that would be genius. Although I’d be too terrified to ever carry out. Those PETA kids are just as bad as that Fred Phelps church. Fundamentalist douchebags. They’d go nuts.
that fur is likely fake and i don’t see the big deal wearing it to a protest, but maybe i don’t see the big deal because i’ve never been or will go to a peta protest, lol but if you are against fur or for it, you’ve got to admit.. the olsen twins look silly all draped in their fur. they’re 22 years old i think, and they look to be about 60 when they dress in the fur.
Anonymous, pointing out blatant stupidity is not bias. It’s showing PETA for what they really are, and also showing that perhaps a steak would benefit their mental processes.
“[The PETA protestors] purpose is to fight against animal abuse…” Like repeatedly picking up dogs from a pound, promising to find them homes, then euthanizing them in the back of a van and discarding the carcasses in a local supermarket’s dumpster? PETA has nothing to do with fighting animal abuse. PETA _is_ animal abuse.
Damn them girls look used and abused
I thought Deceiver wanted stories on “Famous People Only”. I am certainly no fan of PETA, but the chick in the fur trim is just that, some PETA chick, not Pammy or Heather or any of the other PETA bimbos.
Showing up to rag on people for wearing fur, when you are wearing fur (fake or not) is pretty dumb. If they were really trying to fight animal abuse they would be going from area to area to change the animal crulity bylaws. THAT is how you change things, by changing laws. Not by protesting. Protesting if for people who are angry and need an outlet so they can sleep well at night pretending they have made a difference.
Forget the fake fur – it looks like 4 out of the 5 PETA protesters whose feet are visible in the photo are wearing leather shoes. Or is leather OK in the PETA universe?
Fro those who think fake fur is PETA friendly-
The reason designers use fur, the real stuff, is because it is fashionable and buyable. People like it. SO, if you want people to stop using fur and killing animals to get it…you should be fighting the idea that fur is a fashion statement. If PETArds want to change the fashion industry, mebbe they should try not continuing the idea that fur looks cool.
Wearing fake fur is furthering the idea that something that looks like it came off a dead animal is a good choice for clothing. You didn’t kill an animal to make it, so you get to feel good about yourself, but you sure aren’t showing a devotion to the idea of changing the world. It’s another example of the core problem with PETA- they don’t seem to work to CHANGE anything, just to position themselves so that their members can yell at the rest of us sinners.
If you believe in anti-fur to the point of using your body as a visible billboard in a protest line, like these folks, you should be using your image to show that dead-animal chic is not necessary. But they’d rather get angry than think about where the problem comes from.
Anybody go watch the PETA Full House of Horrors video? The way I see it, PETA is endorsing broken families. I mean, were I a PETArd, I might watch that video, then look at my son eating a hamburger and decide that it’s time he lives somewhere else. The whole organization is ridiculous, and their off the deep end advertising might scare children, but any thinking and intelligent adult knows that all they do is find the one case in one hundred that cruelty is actually taking place and slam that label on the entire industry.
And that’s coming from a vegetarian.
But the good news is that the people that support them, the Baldwins and Andersons and the like, are usually celebrities that are long past their usefulness. I’m okay with that, everybody needs a job.
The multi-billionairess Olsens can buy and sell PETA several times over (hey now there’s an idea), so there’s really no issue here. Money is freedom.
That said, those girls (MK&A – I still can’t tell either apart either) are pretty creepy-looking in photos IMHO, but it’s nothing that a few dress sizes upward, a flattering hairstyle, and yeah, age- and size-appropriate clothing couldn’t remedy. And they should stick to live interviews if they want to be in public at all. But yeah, in general they topped out at cute when they were about 6 on FH.
Fortunate Son, you got your Tanner girls mixed up. The meth scabs are for the middle girl (ooh did I just go there).
Every time I see a PETA-tard protest, I want to throw on a mink over a leather outfit, eat a juicy steak and wash it down with a tall glass of milk, then call up Ted Nugent for a little varmint huntin’.
My favorite PETA counter protest ever was at a school in Scotland several years ago. The PETA-tards were trying to stop the school from giving milk to the children at lunch. That’s right, they didn’t want the wee lads and lasses to get their needed calcium. Well, the little Bravehearts took matters into their own hands and started chucking empty milk cartons–and hopefully some full ones–at the PETA freaks, chanting, “Milk for the masses!” The PETA freaks ran away.
Strawberry Girl:
That is my favourite PETA story ever.
One of the biggest anti-fur arguements is that using fur is absolutely not necessary. It’s long gone the time when humans had to kill and animal for warmth, since we have so many alternatives to dress ourselves with now, whether you just want to cover your body or look fashionable. I can see why people think fur is fashionable, it does look kinda nice. So does fake fur. fake fur is also cheaper and doesn’t require torture or slaughter, isnt that great? Wearing fake fur to an anti-fur protest doesn’t seem inconsistent at all to me. I’m an activist, vegetarian, a tree-hugger, but don’t entirely agree with Peta’s methods sometimes. I think sometimes they end up scaring off people, like people who read this website. I must say though, this is the first time I see this (clicked at its ad out of curiosity), and it simply amazes me, how people love to judge and bash, rather than try to keep an open mind and see both sides of the matter.
I agree. You should keep an open mind. Just not so open that your brains fall out.
Some one needs to get those girls a sandwich, And the PETA whackjobs a straight-jacket (Fake-fur lined of course)
“I can see why people think fur
is fashionable, it does look kinda
nice. So does fake fur. fake fur
is also cheaper and doesn’t require
torture or slaughter, isnt that great? …
I’m an activist, vegetarian, a tree-
hugger …”
Well, fake fur is made from petroleum. That’s oil. Real fur is made from animals, which eat waste products like livestock innards and surplus protein that would otherwise go into landfills.
Real tree-huggers would see the inconsistency in drilling for oil just to make a jacket, instead of using a renewable resource like (dare I say?) dead animals.
Reality is a bitch, isn’t it?
I will have to agree with Blue up there, this is an attack on some poor chick who thought she could make a difference. I think it’s pretty sad to rag on protestors or vegetarians or people who try in their own little way to make things better for someone other than themselves. Most of them aren’t doing it because it’s cool, they certainly aren’t doing it because it’s convenient and they aren’t trying to hurt anyone in the process.
All I’m saying is it’s pretty trashy to rag on an average person just because they are doing what they think is right (regardless of their fashion statements).
I wasn’t aware fake fur was made from petroleum, so Samantha, you are right wearing real fur is better for the environment…that’s awesome!
I see nothing wrong with a vegetarian activist wearing faux fur.
It’s like eating vegetarian meat or vegetable based gravy.
When you look good in vegetarian clothing it shows that you can
look how want AND live a cruelty free lifestyle.
I really hate this double standard about animals, we should legalize
eating cats and dogs. Better yet, legalize human meat. At least
then we’d be consistent.
As for petroleum in faux fur, if you drive a car running fossil fuel
or use plastic, then it is not hypocritical to wear faux fur.
Hey, “some chick,” so is it “trashy” to rag on neo-Nazis or guys trying to pick up underage girls on the internet? After all, they are doing “what they think is right.” The point here is not to pick on an “average person,” it’s that PETA takes a holier-than-thou stance on animal rights that’s completely illogical and hypocritical.
Don’t forget that you don’t NEED to wear fur, fake or otherwise, if you live here. It’s fashion. But lots of folks, say, burn victims, actually NEED meat. But PETA won’t allow that.
If you look like you’re killing animals because it’s pretty but are part of an organization that actually kills animals then yells at people for daring to eat animals raised for food…you’re a hypocrite. If you don’t like animals to die for fashion, stop acting like the fashion that spawns those deaths is a-ok!
Also, PETA is famous and hypocritical. So PETA activities are worthy of deceiver, IMO.
Thing is, you can try to defend any one act of PETA’s, but they are so corrupt and hypocritical that there’s no way we can cut them any slack at this point. PETA- If you take guide dogs away from blind people because it’s “kind” and kill strays and pipe bomb shelter directors houses…I’m not cutting anybody who supports you any slack.
“Well, fake fur is made from petroleum. That’s oil. Real fur is made from animals, which eat waste products like livestock innards and surplus protein that would otherwise go into landfills.
Real tree-huggers would see the inconsistency in drilling for oil just to make a jacket, instead of using a renewable resource like (dare I say?) dead animals. ”
Oh the old “but everything is somewhat bad for the enviroment so why care” saying… You know what I love the most about it? I’m pretty da** sure you don’t drive a hibrid, do you? But just in case you wanna learn something new, almost a fifth of global warming emissions come from livestock. Yup, livestock, not oil. Feeding animals livestock also requires growing some ten times as much crops to produce plant foods. On top of that, we have to transport the animals to slaughterhouses, slaughter them, refrigerate their carcasses, and distribute their flesh all across the country (guess what, that uses oil, that you’re so worried about). Producing a calorie of meat protein means burning more than ten times as much fossil fuels–and spewing more than ten times as much heat-trapping carbon dioxide–as does a calorie of plant protein.
“The energy consumption for the production of one coat made out of fake fur was given with 120 MBtu in a study of the scientific research laboratory of the automobile manufacturer Ford in 1979, compared to 433 MBtu for trapped animals and 7,965 MBtu for animals raised in fur farms.”
And since you seem to concerned about the 3R, you might be pleased to know that syntetic fibers can be recycled, or made from recycled products. Amazing, eh?
I bought the book, ashley is the smart one, MK is just SO insecure and makes dumb childish questions…. still love her style though
So wearing the cruelty-free alternative to fur somehow makes one a hypocrite? LOL Deceiver is obviously DESPERATE in their bias against the animal rights movement.
You might have a point if it were real fur, but its obviously fake. That’s like saying that someone eating a Boca burger is a hypocrite, because it “represents” a real hamburger!!!
Yes. Try a tough one next time.
SimonScowl, can you explain better how that works? So far I see you pointing a finger, but not backing up your claims. I’ll admit it might be a bit confusing for people who can’t pick out real from fake fur… But its hardly hypocritical. The protester is living proof that you can have the look without the cruelty!
Also, look up “tu quoque”… Proving animal rights activists to be hypocrites does not discredit the message one bit.
Oh, don’t be an idiot. “Tu quoque” is a loser in a court of law, but it’s always a slam dunk in the court of public opinion.
Pot? Kettle. That’s all it boils down to.If you’re too stupid to see that your own actions make you an imperfect messenger, then you (and your message) deserve what you get.
Beg me.
““Tu quoque” is a loser in a court of law, but it’s always a slam dunk in the court of public opinion. ”
Again though, I’ve not seen one good answer to how wearing fake fur makes one a hypocrite.
I say its simply an active demonstration that the same look can be achieved without the use of a dead animal.
Simon Scowl, I don’t need to beg you for anything. See, as the one pointing the finger, the onus is on YOU to back up your statements. The burden is YOURS, not mine. I have a feeling if you had something intelligent to say back to me, you would have by now.
Vegetarian said:
I’ll probably be sorry for wading into this discussion… But if you wear fake fur nobody but you knows it’s fake. I’m assuming you live in some sort of vegetarian bubble where the possibility of wearing real fur would never cross anyone’s mind, so that option simply wouldn’t be on the table. But for the other 99.5 percent of humanity, when we see someone wearing a furry garment, it’s really a coin-flip.
Wearing a fake-fur coat has the same exact effect on other people as wearing a “real” fur coat: They both fuel a consumer demand for other fur coats (both real and fake). And for those consumers who aspire to own a “real” fur coat someday, seeing lots of fake-fur coats in circulation feeds their desire more than if those fake-fur coats weren’t there (and instead were replaced by Gore-tex jackets or wool pea-coats or something completely different).
This is basic marketing theory 101. It’s ironic, but one of the smartest things furriers could ever have done is to encourage the proliferation of fake-fur garments. They’re a “down-market” knock-off anyway for people who can’t afford the genuine article, but they fuel demand for it. Like a fake Rolex. You don’t really think the Rolex company minds the fake watches being out there, do you? The people who “matter” can tell what’s real, and the fact that the real thing is coveted enough to replicate and knock off in the first place is evidence that it’s culturally indispensable.
You can say the same thing about high-end perfumes (Lalique, Clive Christian, etc.). Nobody there gets upset when your local pharmacy issues a knock-off fragrance, because the person who can pay $15 for the fake was never going to pay $500 for the real thing. But the fact that the knock-off exists at all is a form of free advertising.
Too late.
Simon Scowl – you’ve really got something against me, haven’t you? Truly I don’t see you replying to anyone else with the same frequency as you do me. What’s the problem? I see plenty of other people with opinions similar to mine, but no harassment from you. Plus its always these little two or three word sentences that don’t mean anything. Why do you waste your time saying nothing?
Samantha – Don’t be sorry. If I didn’t want someone to give me an answer, I wouldn’t have asked!
No, I don’t live in a “vegetarian bubble” — though, if those exist, tell me where because I’d consider moving into one! I remember once as a kid, I had 2 pet rabbits, and my dad gave me a fur coat for Xmas. The tag inside said “rabbit fur” and I instantly made the connection to my pets. I don’t know why that’s so foreign for so many people.
I definitely can see your point about the whole knock-off thing. Personally I’d think the average person can easily see & feel fake fur, but maybe not.
If I were organizing a protest personally, I’d probably ask people ahead of time not to wear fake fur, just because the average person would probably be confused by it (as obviously they are). So I can agree with you that its probably not the best idea, and that yes, in a way, its going to perpetuate the “real” fur industry. I’ve known lots of vegs that feel that way about fake fur & fake leather.
On the other hand, I just don’t think it makes the wearer a categorical hypocrite. I think that’s a little strong. Like a lot of what I see against the animal rights movement on this site, its an inconsistency at best.
Only amusement at your persecution complex. Other than that, you seem okay.
Nobody else is posting silly comments in so many different threads all at once. Don’t take it personally.
Simon Scowl – I have no persecution complex, rather I noticed that you respond to nearly each & every single one of my comments, but I don’t see you doing it to others of a similar opinion – or anyone, for that matter. I think anyone of measurable intelligence would pause & say “What’s going on here? What is this?”
Also, I’ve seen a lot of the same names posting comments in different areas of the site. It seems like pretty typical behavior to me, when someone finds a new site, to read different parts & comment accordingly. As I said before, if there is a window during which you’d like to restrict comments, perhaps you should do that, rather than giving new visitors to your site incentive to not return.
Proud Veg – I think I remember you saying that you’re relatively new to the site, so I’ll forgive you for making the mistaken assumption that you’re being singled out by Simon. He does this to all the hardcore vegans that show up here, just like myself and a few others.
I dare say that PETA-bashing is probably the single biggest draw this site has, I know it’s what caught my attention and brought me here originally. Regardless of whether or not you or your vegan friends want to admit it, you’re a vanishingly small, if incredibly vocal, minority. We find the idea that an animal’s life is equal to that of a human’s to be a deeply offensive and misguided one. You said you ‘disagree with their tactics’, just like a lot of the vegans that come here – what you fail to realize is that we not only hate their tactics, we hate their message. Even if that woman is wearing fake fur, the entire ‘vegan’ message is hypocritical from the start, which is why they are so often featured on this site.
Vegan: “Humans and animals are equals! No animal should be a slave!”
Average Joe: “So humans are just animals, and shouldn’t be equated any kind of special status that places us above our animal brethren?”
Vegan: “Exactly!”
Average Joe: “So humans are animals. Animals eat animals every day. If we’re no different, why are we being held to a higher standard?”
Vegan: “Because we’re evolved enough to understand compassion! We’ve built complex societies that can now survive without using animal products! We can grasp that our decisions have consequences!”
Average Joe: “Yeah, we are kinda the shit. So animals can’t understand any of those things, eh? That’s why they get to eat each other?”
Vegan: “Now you’ve got it!”
Average Joe: “So, we are better than them, thus negating your entire argument?”
Vegan: “Wait…”
Of course not. My mistake.
Sorry for the late response, MCmom, picking up chicks on the internet is hardly something “they think is right” most of the time they accept that what they are doing is wrong and do it out of their perverse deviosity.
They just don’t care enough to find an alternative. They think, well millions of perverts pick up underaged girls on the internet, so me NOT picking up underaged girls on the internet wouldn’t really make a difference, or, If I don’t pick up underaged girls on the internet, someone else will. Or another classic meat eater excuse “But I like to and it’s something I’m used to doing”
If you have ever bothered to see exactly how fur is obtained, you would never wear fur in a million years. Please keep in mind that most of our fur comes from China where there are no animal welfare laws. The fur trade in China is gaining ground and there is no way it will stop if we continue to buy fur.
[No spamming, please -- MGMT.]