California bans sale of fur clothing

pile-o-stone

Fantastic news, and hopefully other states/countries will follow suit:

https://www.treehugger.com/sustainable-fashion/california-bans-sale-new-furs.html

"On Friday, California's governor Gavin Newsom signed into law a bill that will ban the sale of all new fur products. The bill (AB44) applies to clothing, handbags, shoes, slippers, hats, key chains, pompoms, etc., and defines fur as anything "with hair, fleece or fur fibers attached thereto." It will take effect on January 1, 2023.

As the New York Times explains, this applies to "mink, sable, chinchilla, lynx, fox, rabbit, beaver, coyote and other luxury furs," while exceptions have been made for deerskin, cowhide, goatskin, and sheepskin, and for the use of fur in religious and traditional cultural ceremonies. Other animal products such as leather, wool, down, silk, and cashmere are not affected, although it's likely these will be the next disputed territory by animal welfare advocates.

Under the new bill, it will be illegal to produce, sell, display, donate, or trade any fur product within the state of California. An initial offence will cost a retailer $500, then $1,000 for subsequent offences. Wearing fur is not illegal, however, so a Californian could still purchase a jacket outside the state and wear it at home, but this obviously becomes more uncomfortable, as one could be accused of breaking the law."

JKenH

How does that save money or save the planet? We farm other mammals for meat - what is the difference farming them for fur?

Philosophical point but if they weren’t farmed that particular sperm and egg would never come together and that animal would not exist. I often think of how random human existence is. Of all the thousands of eggs and sperm only a tiny number produce a human. There are trillions of humans who will never exist - the world will be the same for them as it was for us before we were born and after we die.

Animals are luckier than us, they don’t have the capacity to conceive of death so it doesn’t pervade their every waking thought. It matters not to them whether they die naturally or are put down humanely but if they are farmed they will have existed, when without farming they wouldn’t. That is what human life is programmed to do - exist.

mmmmikey

JKenH wrote: »

How does that save money or save the planet? We farm other mammals for meat - what is the difference farming them for fur?

Philosophical point but if they weren’t farmed that particular sperm and egg would never come together and that animal would not exist. I often think of how random human existence is. Of all the thousands of eggs and sperm only a tiny number produce a human. There are trillions of humans who will never exist - the world will be the same for them as it was for us before we were born and after we die.

Animals are luckier than us, they don’t have the capacity to conceive of death so it doesn’t pervade their every waking thought. It matters not to them whether they die naturally or are put down humanely but if they are farmed they will have existed, when without farming they wouldn’t. That is what human life is programmed to do - exist.

In answer to yor questions (1) nothing - it is posted here because it is an ethical issue concerning spending money and animal welfare (2) some would argue very little, farming animals for meat is as bad as trapping them for fur, whereas others would argue that farming animals for survival (i.e. food) is different to trapping them for fashion / pure indulgence.


You make the assertion that animals don't conceive of death, so what makes them fearful of attack and gives them their survival instinct?


My cat says I only have to see how she reacts to all kind of human emotions and displays emotion herself to see that animals should have rights and that you are talking through your bottom (her words, not mine, apologies in advance for her turn of phrase but you've really upset her)

Hexane

If the alternative to natural materials (fur, hide, etc) for practical purposes, as opposed to fashion, is synthetic materials made from or with fossil resources, then banning the natural versions may not be very "green" ...

JKenH

mmmmikey wrote: »

In answer to yor questions (1) nothing - it is posted here because it is an ethical issue concerning spending money and animal welfare (2) some would argue very little, farming animals for meat is as bad as trapping them for fur, whereas others would argue that farming animals for survival (i.e. food) is different to trapping them for fashion / pure indulgence.


You make the assertion that animals don't conceive of death, so what makes them fearful of attack and gives them their survival instinct?


My cat says I only have to see how she reacts to all kind of human emotions and displays emotion herself to see that animals should have rights and that you are talking through your bottom (her words, not mine, apologies in advance for her turn of phrase but you've really upset her)

Sorry, I didn’t mean to upset your cat. I think we all display emotions a long time before we realise what death is and while an animal may show emotion I don’t believe it has the mental capacity to recognise its own consciousness which is necessary before one can fully understand death. Do you recall the terror you felt when you first realised what death actually is, what happens to your consciousness, your existence? (Those lucky enough to have string religious beliefs (other than AGW) are also spared facing the finality of death.) You look in the mirror, see yourself and realise one day you won’t be around anymore and nothing will exist? I don’t believe cats have to deal with that.

I honestly don’t know anything about the survival instinct but even the most basic animals seem to run if they feel threatened. I am sure it will be explained somewhere on the net.

I think the reason given for starting the thread on here (the spending money bit rather than saving it) is somewhat tenuous. Although extremely distasteful and I would not suggest doing so, it would be logically more justifiable as a topic for this board to discuss putting one’s pet down.

It all does go to show how with a bit of imagination and a generous interpretation of the word ethical one could find a basis for discussing virtually anything as green and ethical money saving.

Hexane

JKenH wrote: »

Do you recall the terror you felt when you first realised what death actually is, what happens to your consciousness, your existence?

I don't. (I'm not religious either). What age were you when you first experienced this terror, Ken?

JKenH

Hexane wrote: »

I don't. (I'm not religious either). What age were you when you first experienced this terror, Ken?

I was quite old, 13 actually, although I think most children experience it much younger. I had been brought up very religiously so always had been taught there was life after death. Maybe I have too vivid an imagination.

Are you saying you don’t remember or have you never been frightened of death?

mmmmikey

JKenH wrote: »

I was quite old, 13 actually, although I think most children experience it much younger. I had been brought up very religiously so always had been taught there was life after death. Maybe I have too vivid an imagination.

Are you saying you don’t remember or have you never been frightened of death?

Interesting philosophical point. It's something I've never rationalised in this way, I can't honestly say that I can remember ever feeling this terror in the way that you describe.


Have I been scared of dying? Yes, having come too close a few years back - and I can certainly vouch for near death expereince as being every bit as life changing as is said. But can I trace that fear to some point back in my childhood when I realised what death is? No, I honestly can't.


I wonder if the difference here is that your religous background in your formative years lead you to form a view of death that was subsequently shattered in your early teenage years, whereas I never had that view to shattered?


My cat is online now doing some research. She says she accepts your apology and understands that humans are really dumb and can't even lick their own bottoms, so how can they be expected to know what cats think......

1961Nick

There have been a few documentaries about the fur trade & the treatment of animals is often horrific. I don't have an issue with people who want to wear fur, but I do have a big issue with cruelty to animals. Unfortunately, the type of animals that provide fur usually have to be contained in a cage otherwise they'd escape. That's enough of a reason to ban the trade for me.

There was another documentary that tested fake fur sold in stores & online. It was surprising to see how many of these fake fur items were actually made from real pelts. In most cases the customer, retailer & the wholesaler thought they were fake.

Hexane

JKenH wrote: »

Maybe I have too vivid an imagination.

I had a fairly religious schooling and only a small amount of imagination, this left very little fear of death but a significant fear of all manner of things on earth.

JKenH wrote: »

Are you saying you don’t remember or have you never been frightened of death?

If you look out the window (physical or virtual) at kids of all ages doing what kids do, you will realise that the vast majority of kids simply do not believe themselves capable of suffering any harm at all, much less death. It simply doesn't enter into their imagination, not at 13 nor at any other age.

Everyone's different, though.

I've been frightened enough (as an adult) to get an unexpected lump looked at, but that's a fear of something slightly different. An alternative is being frightened enough to not get it looked at, which I also experimented with for a while.

Hexane

There's been plenty of documentaries about the cruelty to animals used to provide meat, too. Perhaps it's "more avoidable" there, perhaps not. The point where it gets really silly is refusing to eat honey or anything that contains it (true veganism); those bees really are enjoying themselves however the system is worked.