Even if you know nothing about PETA, you know that they hate fur, they hate people owning fur, and they hate people wearing fur. Or so we thought.
Virginian-Pilot writer Jamesetta Walker wrote about PETA’s request for French First Lady Carla Bruni-Sarkozy to donate her furs to the less fortunate:
The PETA correspondence said it receives thousands of fur coats from people whose feelings about wearing real fur have changed. Because the animals can’t be brought back, PETA sends the coats to homeless shelters and refugee camps, uses them in educational displays and gives them to wildlife rehabilitators to use as bedding for orphaned animals.
Run that by me again: Homeless people and people in refugee camps are walking around wearing celebrities’ real fur coats?
Really? PETA will let me wear fur so long as they give it to me? Fascinating.
Where is the refugee sign-up sheet? I’d like some celebrity fur hand-me-downs to wear. (Mental note: Stay in refugee camp away from PETA paint throwers.)
How can you tell someone her fur coat is morally wrong and then give it to someone else, especially when nonanimal clothes come a dime a dozen?
And can you imagine what you’d look like — if you were to become homeless — standing on the street with a “Will Work for Food” sign but you’re wearing Mimi’s rigged fur coat?
I don’t think I have anything to add. Except that PETA = fail.
Related posts:
- Bethenny Frankel Would Rather Eat Veal Than Wear Fur UPDATE: Page Six is on the case, and the other...
- Pamela Anderson Must Wear a Disguise at Nordstrom Isn’t Pamela Anderson just so talented and amazing? In an...
- Carla Bruni-Sarkozy Has A Certain ‘Je Ne Pense Pas’ A leader of a free nation should know you don’t...
- Michelle Obama Wears Alligator, PETA Keeps Its Mouth Shut We all know that PETA hates Presidential Fly Swatting...
- PETA Steamrolls Jessica Simpson But Gives Angelina Love Animal Times is apparently no Cat Fancy — this magazine...
Sign me up!!
Actually, this is a REALLY good idea. Think about it, most people who own fur now are rich, pampered pansies who wouldn’t/couldn’t lift a finger against someone who assaults them. Now, stick with me here – if we get enough poor people wearing nice fur, some PETArd is bound to toss paint on one of them eventually, mistaking them for an evil rich fur-wearer.
That ass-beating should be epic enough to warrant a new chapter in the freaking Bible, and I can only hope someone gets it on tape and posts it on Youtube.
Wait a minute. “…and gives them to wildlife rehabilitators to use as bedding for orphaned animals.”
I thought peta’s position that mans interference of any kind with animals was unacceptable. peta’s logic would dictate that orphaned animals be left to die. “Let nature take its course.” I was actually told this by a peta supporter/member(?) So why would they support any kind of animal rehabilitation? Or am I missing something?
Psst…Pasta: They just don’t want anyone wearing fur. Except for narsty little poor folk, who can’t AFFORD scruples.
Obama is busted for staging a question with HuffingtonPost writers…
http://www.politico.com/blogs/michaelcalderone/0609/Obama_calls_on_HuffPost_for_Iran_question.html
I want to know what these “educational displays” are. Dioramas showing paint and flour attacks?
I want to see the PETA paint-throwers get beat up. You could make some money selling tickets to the beatdown. And PETA would actually have some goodwill thrown their way. I’m feeling more friendly towards them already…oh wait it passed.
Re: Obama Press Conference
Wow. That question exchange was prearranged and still seems clumsy! I guess that was to make it seem impromptu… That generally works better when the reporter doesn’t use the same lead-in that the president just used!
i dont’ get why it matters who wears the fur. maybe they just don’t want the rich people wearing it? if you paid for the fur, its clearly wrong, in their opinion, but if its given to you… where do i get in line?
I’m with you on that one, Scott F. It would probably be the most entertaining thing on YouTube yet.
“You know, if I could talk to the animals…I WOULDN’T, ’cause they’re f##kin’ ANIMALS, okay? I have a hard enough time being decent to my fellow human beings. The last thing I need is to be sitting around a campfire with a quartet of loquacious spider monkeys. ‘Ling-ling, would you like another s’more?’”
–Dennis Miller, Black and White
Scott F. for the win.
So, can I wear my great-grandma’s fur jacket per PeTA’s logic here since I didn’t buy it myself? Or do I have to be homeless and get some celebrity numnuts to give me one?
I know I’m being a little more generous to PeTA than I have to be, but is the animal less dead because the fur is recalled? From PeTA’s point of view, they’re probably making the best of a bad situation.
Any guesses how many of these now sanctified fur coats end up on craigslist or ebay??
You could buy alot of Thunderbird and crack for what those coats would sell for.
You can wear fur if it’s given to you but you can’t buy it yourself? If my mother got me a fur coat it’s okay because I didin’t buy it myself? Wth!!
As much as I hate PETA, I kind of have to agree with them on this, in a way. It follows their own internal logic perfectly well; they hate rich people for buying a fur coat, which supports an industry that’s focussed on killing animals, which they hate. Donating the coats to poor people after they’ve been surrendered does not financially support the “animal murderers” as PETA sees them. It’s one of the few humanitarians efforts by PETA that actually makes sense; destroying the coats achieves nothing, giving the coats to the poor helps the poor. It’s not like poor people wearing donated fur coats will result in more animals being killed.
As far as the coats being used as bedding for orphaned animals being hypocritical since they hate all forms of human interaction with animals, then it may simply be case of some PETA members having different opinions than others.
That said, PETA sucks. It’s just this particular issue where I don’t feel they’ve eaten an entire plate of failcakes.
Kelli: That’s the kind of logic espoused by quite a few in the liberal elite. “We’re willing to dole out a few things as we see fit, but it’s wrong for you to get it for yourself.”
So it’s okay to eat meat as long as I didn’t purchase it myself?
Minnow wins the thread.
Nice, Minnow! Are there any celebrities with guilty consciences that want to donate some steaks to me?
I’ve got a mink coat. I’m not rich. I worked hard for it at an honest job. I don’t eat meat yet people who do, criticize me for wearing fur. Last time I checked, animals slaughtered for food are brutalized on a far larger scale than fur bearing animals. Yes, I wish ALL animals could be humanely slaughtered with no pain involved. Now you may say I don’t need to wear fur well then, by that reasoning people also don’t need to eat meat.
PETA members who physically attack people wearing fur should be brutally beaten themselves. Protest if you must but you have NO right to damage a persons property OR do them physical harm.
When PETA members hurt humans they are saying that animals are more important.
And…………I’ve got pets…………three stray cats who were thrown out on the streets, probably by people who would refuse to wear fur!!