Many top designers are banning fur from their collections but, is it acceptable to buy vintage fur?
Camden Market has recently joined London’s community of fur-free markets. From the 1st of March, merchants have refused to sell fur, vintage or new, following a similar ethical strategy as other retailers in the capital such as Stella McCartney, Old Spitafields market and Vivienne Westwood.
In the 90s, the “I'd rather go naked than wear fur” campaign led by PETA encouraged the banishment of fur in New York’s and London’s catwalks. Today, many elite fashion designers are choosing to remove fur from their craft-work. PETA is running a campaign for a #FurFreeBritain, urging the UK Government to commit to a ban on imported cat, dog and seal fur even after Brexit, and extending it to all animal pelts.
Tones of fur coats hang in thrift shops and flea markets across the country, many of them inherited from our past generations who bought them guilt-free in an era when animal rights awareness wasn’t a thing.
A poll from RSPCA reveals that today 80% of Britons are against wearing real fur. However, should we condemn vintage fur clothing the same way that we critic new pelts? After all, re-using old fur clothes means that no animals are killed today to satisfy our extravagant and luxurious fashion taste. Unfortunately, it is not as simple as that. There are some moral reasons why we should care about this practice even if the animal was killed 50 years ago.
With vintage becoming popular within the fashion industry, and growing campaigns raising environmental concerns; recycling fur clothes seems ethically sound. In terms of material waste and resource conservation, a reason exists to wear second-hand fur. However, the idea of vintage should not mean you can purchase animal pelts with a clear conscious. Many believe that it enables people to wear warm clothes guilt-free and without perpetuating the demand. But it shouldn’t matter if the animal was killed decades ago or yesterday, or if we bought it ourselves or it was inherited from past generations. Fur will forever represent suffering and animal cruelty. By wearing fur, vintage or otherwise, we are only promoting animal suffering and advertising the torturing of animals with our fluffy garments. All in the name of fashion.
One thing that we know for sure is that the fashion industry is filled with moral and ethical dilemmas. The line between supporting animal cruelty and being kind to the environment is somewhat blurred when faced with a choice between recycled vintage garments and consumerism. Ultimately, there is no place for real fur in the 21st century, and unless you are an Inuit or Siberian tribesman your fur clothing is out of place, unless it’s fake.
Comments