Local band Western Aerial photo shoot and protest yesterday (10/16) at Schumacher Furs

video clips

video clips

I was at the protest with my friend for a while, and just wnat to say that a bunch of folks walking by watched video and got some flyers. People talked to them politely about what fur is about. Lots of folks thanked protesters for being out. A couple videos that are posted makes it look like the protest was more confrontational than it was. When mostly people just got educated. I kinda think that when folks do a post talking about a protest they should think about how it appears to the people reading it. Some things in this makes that protest seem kind of petty and confrntational. Not good at buiding public relations! Think!

Though the video of the chick trying to look sexy in lingerie and fur and falling on her ass was classic.

one of the photographer's supporters had posted a link to this article in a comment on his myspace page. He removed it. I guess he's probably embarrassed to have his hostile bare butt on the internet. Someone with a myspace account (I don't have one) may want to send a link to his posted friends - they might be interested in knowing what the photographer is really like, as he pretends to be so "caring" on his site. Link to his site above.

I have to say to the people who think that they are so compassionate, they are not. Instead of asking if I was ok or helping me up, they just looked on. And they love animals? Sad.

I have tried to leave numerous comments on this page and somehow only the ones that are supportive to your cause show up. I have to say you bash all of us for not having compassion, but you maliciously intend to embarass and humiliate me. I did not say anything to the protestors at any time and was not involved in any way with any altercation that happened that evening. You are the ones with no compassion. I at least will show my face and speak out about things I believe in, and I do believe in the right to free speech. Showing me in a compromising position is not about that. It is malicious and an invasion of my privacy. I had no intention to be photographed by your people and was not capable of doing anything to stop it. I sincerely understand what you are trying to do, I do however think that you are going about it the wrong way. If you want to show skinned animals, or someone who is intentionally mooning you, I can be all right with that, but to show me in the state that I was in is an invasion of my personal privacy and one that I might choose to persue.

right, how were we supposed to "help you up" or "ask if you were o.k.?" We aren't allowed in the store (in fact no one is allowed in the store who looks "different").

And NO, you do NOT "understand what we are trying to do." If so, you would not be helping to promote a fucking fur store.

Look at some videos on  http://www.furisdead.com Watch dogs and cats in cages thrown off an 8 foot drop, breaking their bones. Watch animals skinned alive. furless and still blinking thrown on a bloody heap of the skinned animals who came before them. Watch animals get their necks broken, get anally electrocuted, get strangled to make that fur that you're so eager to model. Think about animals caught in traps legally for up to a week - starving, dehydrating, freezing, getting ripped apart by predators so you can wrap their fur on your bloated body.

Stop feeling so sorry for yourself and give some compassion to the animals (I don't care if you like me). Stop supporting an asshole like the photographer who says he could "give a fuck" what happens to the animals. Humans can take care of ourselves - these animals cannot. We're their only voice - and your actions support their needless abuse and torture.

To the humiliated one, the only person I felt deserved humiliation was the photographer. For the humiliation you feel I am sorry. I have to add though that the models CHOSE to participate in an event at a fur store. Nobody forced any of you to show up there. By doing so and draping yourselves in fur to be photographed you are in effect promoting this horribly cruel industry. Animals are skinned alive, anally electrocuted, gassed, trapped, beaten, etc. They often live miserable lives before they are killed. Had any of you thought about how much suffering you were putting on your backs? That's what Gregg and Linda Schumacher sell, massive amounts of suffering. Did this not occur to any of the models who participated in the photo shoot? Fur doesn't magically appear, it is torn off the bodies of tens of millions of animals so folks like those who participated in the photo shoot can look "glamourous" or "sexy" or whatever. And by being photographed in the fur (and I'm assuming the photos will be published, they are meant to appeal to the public in some form), those who did it and and those who helped make it happen are helping to create even more suffering. Everyone who participated is responsible, the band members, the photographers, the support and the models. You all had a choice, the band could have chosen a cruelty-free environment to hold the photo shoot, the photographers could have said no and the models could most certainly have said no. But nobody did, you all showed up. Shame on all of you for doing so. Any money earned (paid out by the band) that night is blood money. If you received no compensation for your services you still did the animals a disservice. If what you and the other models did inspires someone to buy a fur garment then the "inspiring" souls share some responsibility for other animals who will be slaughtered as a result. Yes, I wish compassion was universal, compassion for all species. Sometimes it's hard for those who are aware of it (the pain and suffering), who feel it, to show the same compassion to those who contribute to the cruelty. Speaking only for myself, it's not an excuse but an explanation. Did anyone there Sunday night say "I'm uncomfortable with this" or "maybe the activists make some sense" or "I care about animals, I shouldn't be wearing their skins"? I looked at the band's blog/page on myspace.com and I didn't the sense that they had any idea why were were there Sunday (was just a party atmosphere to them). We do our best to be the voices of the voiceless. It doesn't always come out pretty and nice but we're all passionate and this is a very emotional thing for us. Watch a video of a Chinese fur farm, watch the animals being beaten before they are hung up and sliced open, the skin ripped from their bodies while they are still blinking as they cry out in pain. I dare you to watch one of these videos. Tell me you aren't affected, aren't horrified at the brutality you've seen. I wish all of those who participated Sunday would watch the videos and educate yourselves about the fur industry, then maybe some of you would understand why we feel as we do. This stuff is real, we don't make it up. Some of you might have just not thought about it before but it's not too late. The next time you and/or other models are asked to model in fur just say no.

Regarding the photographer Daniel James, he knew there were cameras around and that people were using them. None of us encouraged him to drop his pants and moon the activists. It was purely his choice. He shouldn't be surprised that the unfortunate incident was recorded. He should be embarassed. It was a crass, classless action on his part. So his bad judgement has been exposed, that's the way it goes. He should have thought about it before he dropped his pants.

Suffering at the hands of humans isn't just in the fur industry, it's on factory farms and in slaughterhouses and elsewhere. All of the activists I spoke with Sunday night are vegan. I am vegan. That means we were were not wearing leather or wool or other materials that came from an animal. It's not so hard to do. If anyone who participated Sunday wants to talk peacefully about the fur industry please join us on any Saturday between 1 and 5 pm at Schumacher's. We will be nice. I suspect we won't be seeing or hearing from any of you. Please prove me wrong.

And, yeah, I probably wouldn't do something like that again. The protestors were o.k. They weren't rude to me or anything. One person tried to offer me a flier, but they mostly just ignored me when I walked in. I'm looking into the whole fur issue for myself. I guess I can see why they care so much about this.

Be careful in thinking that all the models must feel or act the same. I know that not all the protestors feel or act the same too. I know that people who don't like the models say that we all must think the same about this, and people who don't like the protestors are acting like they're all just the same too. But we're all individuals. So I don't like to see "the models..." or "the protestors..." like they're just one entity.

I guess I have to thank the protestors who were there for opening my eyes.

And yeah, the photographer sucks.

So Glamour Girl, when the members of Western Aerial put the word out in the future
that they want to have another photo shoot at Schumacher's are you going to participate?
Will you in the future show respect and compassion for the animals by rejecting the fur
industry, no fur coats, no fur trim, no fur anything? The fur belongs to the original owners,
the mink, the foxes, the rabbits, the dogs and cats and all the other animals who are killed
for it. Please do your part to not support this industry. Choices, choices, choices. You
don't have to like me or any of the activists and that's fine. It's about the animals. So
what will you do Glamour Girl?

And I would like to second the comment that we are not allowed in the store. The Schumacher
employee (a young woman who is always present during the Saturday protests) present that
day/evening would probably have had us arrested for trespassing if we tried to enter.
That's what Gregg and Linda Schumacher would do. Everyone on the inside must have known we
were not permitted inside. What a nonsensical statement (comment above), to suggest that
we could have helped in any way.

I know most readers are not going to warm up to this message, but that's me, and I am an ARA.

I felt a little sorry for the models--I can imagine that they worked hard to be models and every job is hard won. Especially if they are not big name models, the probably don't feel like they can afford to be choosey about their employment.

Hey, I'm just jealous. You all look great, and the glamour girl who fell was all smiles, doing a curtsey for the unwanted crowd.

So I'm sorry if you feel picked on. Yet, I think a little consciousness raising hurts no one. I'm sure the protesters made you feel uncomfortable. But we are there to make you think--if you made the hard choice not to model fur, you'd be throwing your weight toward a cultural change for a better world.

So although I do feel compassion, and I know other protesters do too, any discomfort you may feel is insignificant compared to the suffering of animals.

If you got caught in the cross-fire of battle, you need to consider that there is no such thing as neutral here. You're furthering the cultural fetish for bloodied animal parts. Of course protesters get loud and emphatic: we're trying to face you with facts. We're trying to bring you out of denial.

P.S. You probably didn't see your posts because they went to Discussion--a system that does cause some confusion.

I would like to point out something that is a little interesting to me......the protest was against animal cruelty but yet the first video you post up is the video of the photographer mooning the camera....BUT the majority of the video actually focuses on me the "young woman in lingerie" in fact right at the beginning the cameraman even zooms in on my a**.....so if the point of the video was to humiliate the photographer than why show the other part of the video that is zooming in on the model that was NOT even wearing FUR???

A comment was made that the bands music must suck so they have to have models pose in fur in order to sell albums but I think that maybe you needed a young woman in lingerie walking through the store with a close-up on my a** to get people to watch yours.....interesting.

I would also like to point out that not all the protestors were nice and polite with trying to spread your message, right when I was walking up and before I even got to the doors I was being called a "fur whore" repeatedly....I would like to refer back to your own rules posted about protesing and it says not to make personal attacks on anyone but I am not sure how yelling at a model and calling her a "fur whore" is not a personal attack. I would like to point out that poosting the video of the model falling and calling her the "fur hag of the week" is also a personal attack.

Also who owns leather shoes? People who live in glass houses shouldnt throw stones.

Thanks for your time,
The Young Woman in Lingerie

There was no specific intent to zoom in on any part of you. The camera
does not zoom in that close and I wouldn't have anyway. I was just
recording activity in the room and you were there. The zoom level
was reduced later in the clip to get a broader view of what was going
on...and I didn't know the photographer would moon us but he was foolish
enough to do so. I took that gesture by the photographer as a "screw you"
gesture and his overall attitude toward those of us who care passionately
about the animals. I not trying to entice anyone into watching the clip.
I was just trying to describe (in this page) something that identifies
the two most promintent individuals in the clip. I will never know who (other
than you) watches the clip and I get no benefit from any of this. People
can take from it what they want but most significant is the attitude of the
photographer.

>>A comment was made that the bands music must suck so they have to have models
pose in fur in order to sell albums

I did not say that. This is what I said...

"I haven't heard their music but if it sucks then it seems women in fur won't make up
for it. If their music is good they won't need fur to sell it. It's so unnecessary."

Please quote me accurately. There's a big difference between the words "must" and "if".
Don't you agree?

You make valid points about personal attacks, point taken...and the "Fur hag" reference
has been removed from the other website. I have other clips of limited interaction
with the band members (people should know who the band members who arranged the whole
thing are) and some other stuff (like umbrellas suck in the windows that I think was
funny) that happened later in the evening. I will likely post some (but certainly not
all) of what was recorded. Most of it is pretty dull stuff. I record bits of all our
protests, it's a historical accounting kind of thing...and some music fans might be
interested in what musicians are promoting the fur industry.

And though in that one clip you weren't wearing fur it seemed you were prepping for a
shoot and I assumed you'd be wearing it (isn't that why you were there?). A little
bit later (than the clip on this site) you walked away from the area where the pictures
were taken (I didn't even realize you were there and you walked past quickly) and it
appeared you were wearing fur for the shoot. Are you saying you didn't wear fur
during that time?

I was just capturing bits of an unusual evening involving musicians, models and fur.
There was no intent to focus in on you or any other person other than to capture
activity in the room. I apologize if it seemed that way.

>>Also who owns leather shoes? People who live in glass houses shouldnt throw stones.

What is your point with this statement? I own nothing containing even the smallest
amount of leather. I do not wear or use products made of leather (or any other animal-
derived ingredient/component), ever. Vegans do not eat or wear any products made with
animal-derived ingredients or components. I don't think you would have found leather
shoes on any of the other activists either.

So, please tell us your feelings about the fur industry. Do you want to defend the
needless suffering and slaughter of many millions of animals for something so unnecessary?
Is there a part of you that feels wearing fur is wrong? I'll ask you the same questions I
asked Glamour Girl (only use that name because I don't have another to refer to her
by, I mean no disrespect in using that made-up name)....

When the members of Western Aerial put the word out in the future that they want to
have another photo shoot at Schumacher's are you going to participate? Will you in
the future show respect and compassion for the animals by rejecting the fur industry,
no fur coats, no fur trim, no fur anything?

Please share your thoughts about the fur industry with us. A good point was made by
Model X, all models aren't the same and all activists aren't the same. I would like to
give you the benefit of the doubt that you do care about animals. If you have a cat
or a dog or another companion animal you surely care about him or her. In China dogs
and cats are killed for their fur. You wouldn't wear your cat or dog (assuming you have
one or two or three...) would you? Do other animals not deserve the same respect you
show them? I hope in the future you will say no to wearing fur. Will you?

What I want is for people who participated in the shoot to have an understanding of why
we were there, and to make you think about what it means to buy and/or wear fur. Surely
we had other things we could have been doing on a rainy Sunday afternoon/evening. We
were there to convey a message. We weren't there to gawk. It's about the animals
as I've said before.

Thanks for reading.

NO ONE was called a "fur whore." I absolutely guarantee you that NO ONE there would use that word. So you are either lying, or you misheard. I doubt anyone called you a "fur hag" either (I think you heard that women going inside might be called that, but I don't recall ANY of that that evening), but if you were called a "fur" anything, that was it.

One of the models did call me a "bitch" though, when I tried to give her literature. So I guess "you people" (since you're all the same, right?) need to work on your own behavior (see the problem with holding everyone accountable for one person's behavior?)

I doubt anyone there was wearing leather shoes (that's a favorite accusation of fur promoters though). Have you heard of "synthetic?" It can look a lot like leather. But even if someone was wearing it, leather is not the same issue as fur...but I'm not going to waste time trying to explain this to you, since your real motivation is to try to discredit: if you want more information about why your argument is not a good one, come to a protest and ask someone.

I don't know why the photographer decided to focus on your ass and put it on here. I would not have made that choice. But I doubt anyone is all that eager to see it. I know I wasn't. People who come to a protest (and I suppose models too), all have their own opinions about what they believe in and want to do.

How do you feel about supporting animal torture, anyway? Have you seen an animal get skinned alive? Go to  http://www.furisdead.com and have a look at where the fur you were wearing came from. Then maybe you can put your own "issues" in perspective. I personally think your values are appalling. But I'm someone who doesn't support hurting animals terribly for a fun fashion item.

You know its funny....I wouldnt have come up with the "fur whore" comment on my own.....and the even funnier thing is several of the models also reported that they were called "fur whores" as they walked in...I even told the police officer that came by that someone in your group called me a "fur whore" so I myself am not a liar but it seems that you in particular are in denial or you have selective hearing to maybe feel better about the protests you participate in so you can say they are completly peaceful and well meaning.....and by the way the "Fur Hag" comment has even bee posted on portlandfurcruelty.com's site which if you read the reponse right above yours you would have saw that the author of the response even stated that it was posted and had since been taken down....so just another example of your denial and selctive hearing/reading of what you WANT to believe....hey whatever makes it easier for you to deal with the fact that you either participate in protests that verbally abuse people that dont stop and bow down to the point they are attempting to get across or even that you, yourself has said such things.

I value peoples opinions when it is demonstrated in a respectful way....I would gladly stop and hear a perspective from someone that has obviously taken time out of their own weekend for a cause that they support but as soon as I walk by and am called a "fur whore" (which HAPPENED) I do not value their opiion at all because if a person has to belittle someone else to try and get their point heard it is not worth listening to in my opinion.

Also you say "we are all the same"....where did that even come from? Another thing I would like to point out is everyone keeps referring to a website that shows video of an animal getting skinned which you tell people to go watch but when I see that same comment being written by multiple people over and over as a defense to their cause it kinda sounds like a script...I which kinda makes your group "all the same"

You even go on to question my values and suggest that I have "issues" and I need perspective.....are you a therapist that has years of education to make an assumption that a person has issues and needs perspective in their life after reading one comment posted on a forum? Your high and mighty attitude also just makes your statements seems less valuable and definatly not anything to do with protecting animals. Many of the comments I see hear on this site as well as others dont even focus on educating people its just a lot of finger pointing......refocus your attempt towards the actual cause and maybe people will listen and not give protestors such a hard time.

"The young woman in lingerie"

<a href=" link to blog.myspace.com target="_blank">Western Aerial Blog on myspace.com</a>

From the band (and the band's recollection of events pertaining to the activists doesn't match mine, but who cares about details):

"The shoot was amazing! The best sunday night of my life. . .at one point I was surrounded by scantily clad models drinking whiskey staright from the bottle in a $25,000 coat. Just when it couldn't have gotten any more surreal, the girl who won America's Next Top Model (Johanna House?) showed up and started taking pictures with us. I'll be honest I was kinda wasted so I don't really remember talking with her, but I'm sure whatever I said was very clever and sophisticated."

Wow, my respect for the band has just gone way up (uh huh). Booze, scantily clad models, $25,000 coats,
and rock and roll. So is there any substance to this band or is it all about indulgence? Glamour Girl, Lingerie
Woman, other models (except for Model X, thank you for your remarks a few comments back :-) ), do any of you
feel a little bit exploited by the band?

And a comment from the photographer:

"All I can say is...I could give a fuck. LOL (you have to see the video to understand...)
And, their pic of my ass mooning them says it all. Western Aerial fucking rocks, the models fucking rock, and the next time, we need TWO fifths of whiskey.
Well, maybe not. I probably would have gone to jail LOL...

Mess with my girls, and my friends, and I will have their back, every time :o)"

The post to the Western Aerial blog by Mr. James doesn't do anything to enhance my impression of him. So Glamour Girl, Lingerie Woman, other models (except for Model X), are you cool with being thought of as his girls? Was/is the photo shoot part of a grand plan for the band to try to make it to the big time, that is, get signed to a label? What was the purpose of having you (all models) draped in fur and photographed by Mr. James? Are you cool with that (the entire photo shoot) as the image of rock and roll, or maybe just this band? Please share with us your thoughts about the experience and why you were there. Were any of you uncomfortable with the shoot, or that it took place in a fur store? It's certainly not fair to think of all models as the same. Here's a chance for us to get to know some of you a little better.

Thanks.

We've heard all the arguments before. Good try. Even if a person does wear leather, that as little to do with the fur industry. Most leather comes from cows that were slaughtered for people to eat. Fur animals are raised for that luxery along, and arguably suffer worse when they are skinned alive.

Seriously, we were just standing out there were a man who had worked in the fur industry stopped and explained that because they are more flexible when alive and can be skinned faster, there is motivation to do it that way even though laws prohibit it.

I imagine you haven't spent the time thinking about these issues that we have. But especially as a model, you may want to begin to consider the ethical implications of your choices. Enlightenment ius a good thing.

Sorry - you were NOT called a "fur whore." That has NEVER been a shout or a chant outside the store. NEVER. There are many, many hours of videotape and you will never hear that word on them. Except: Linda Schumacher used that word herself, shouting at protesters. And old Mr. Schumacher, who held up a sign saying "(a protester) is a whore" - that is part of public record.

Say it all you want, but anyone who comes to a protest can see for themselves: that's not a word a protester there would use.

This is making me think: YOU'RE the one who brought the word into this conversation. Maybe you're the one running around calling people "whores." I think you are.

Hey lingerie woman (I think I'll just refer to you as LW from now on), all you've done in your postings is avoid the questions/issues that have been posed to you. You've avoided comment about the fur industry (and I'm talking about the industry, not activists, not one person's website, not other postings on this website). You've avoided talking about your promotion of fur. You've probably avoided even thinking about it. Well, think about it and try addressing the real issues for a change. Regardless of what any activist might have said or not said, or whether you might have seen an activist wearing leather shoes (I'm betting you didn't, there are synethics and I wear canvas shoes), the reality is what it is. The truth is the animals are often mistreated, live in horrible conditions before they are killed by numerous brutal methods (and I suppose you didn't mind the Canadian seal hunts where the animal's skulls are bashed in), Schumacher Furs is selling the cruelty and you were modeling/promoting it last Sunday night. Seems you are in denial about all of it. So give the defense of the fur industry your best shot. Let's hear your words of wisdom in defense of the industry. Might I suggest you take some time to picture these animals, whose skins you were wearing, alive and free. Then picture yourself skinning an animal alive or anally electrocuting an animal, or maybe strangling one (yes those are some of the ways in which they are killed). A little unpleasant? Wouldn't want to do that yourself? Then you are a hypocrite, you'll have someone else do the dirty work and you'll wear the end product. So let's cut thru the nonsense, the avoidance, the misdirection and hear your defense of the industry and the promotional photo shoot you took part in. Let's hear it straight, no more finger pointing at the messengers. It's about your behavior and ultimately about the animals.

You really didn't get what was being said about "fur hag" (not that it has never been used, but I doubt it was used towards you) and models being "all the same" (that was an ironic comment because you refer to protesters as "you people" as though WE'RE all the same). That's a more subtle level of comprehension than you understood, but maybe you can go back and re-read the post you were referring to.

You've been making it clear that you don't care about how animals are used for their fur. You're looking for excuses to not address or care about the actual issue. So, "lingerie woman" - enough about us - are YOU still going to support this industry that hurts animals so much?

You're also kind of making the argument that some people just are not going to care about the animals at all, and probably the only thing that will work with them is to make fur less comfortable socially to wear and promote. In that spirit, we SHOULD make it uncomfortable for you to go in there. You can seldom make a slaveholder give up his slaves with "reason" alone. The slaveholder has to have a working conscience to even care.

I have to say the sad thing is, I have now been told I don't understand. I do understand the way furs are made, I do understand why you object. The fact that I don't completely share your opinion does not mean that I don't understand. So shame on you for your assumption. There are horrible things that happen everyday in the world. I would place my energy saving children, or helping handicapped, or helping the elderly.
I have been watching the posts here everyday since the shoot and I have to say thank you. It did raise my awareness. And if that is what you are trying to do, kudos for that. But, it still does not mean that I agree with you or how you choose to protest.
The windows were covered, although not completely. This was a private shoot, not intended for onlookers. I did have an expectation of privacy.
Yes I wore fur. Do I do that all of the time? no. Would I do it again? Maybe.
I hope that you realize though, only a limited amount of posts come from people who weren't there. So, who are you trying to raise awareness for?

O.k. you've told Indymedia readers what you think about the protesters (throwing in some rude comments yourselves as well). That's getting old.

Now, you have been presented with places you can go to get information about the fur industry. You've heard that animals are treated very cruelly for fur. What are you going to do about it? Are you going to keep giving EXCUSES for why the protesters are bad and that's why you CAN'T POSSIBLY care about animals (like, if only the protesters were different, you would have cared)? Or are you going to reconsider your support of fur/animal abuse?

It doesn't matter whether you like us or you hate us, whether you insist (lie) that protesters called you a "whore," this isn't a personality contest. Animals are still getting tortured for their fur. Do you care? Are you going to continue to support it?

Placing your energy saving children or helping the handicapped humans does not give you the moral right to HURT animals. Just lay the hell off of them. That's not to much to ask. Don't go out and protest for them. But stop wearing their tortured skins. Stop being a bully towards defenseless animals.

If I don't care about kids, would it be o.k. for me to enslave them (in another country where it's legal)?

So you say that you understand the issue now (did you watch any video? If not, please do), but you still might wear/promote fur again. Don't you think that gives the argument that protesters should make it as uncomfortable as possible for you to do so? That they should go out of their way to point out your fur and how unethical it is? A protester being polite will not change your mind (since you say your mind is made up and you have different values - values that make torture o.k., I guess). But someone being direct about the issue, being loud about the issue, may make it "not worth the trouble," if nothing else.

The expectation of privacy in a storefront like this, that has been protested for a very long time, is not really valid. Many people place the objection to unconscionable cruelty above the preference for some to participate in it privately.

postings aren't showing up right away - glamour girl's post showed up after I made my response, but looks like it was written before.;l

Oh, for goodness sake. Like, you're the first person ever to ask that. Please. Wanna know why everyone responded the same, Lingere woman? It's because EVERYONE lacking in thought and imagination asks that. EVERYONE.

The really stupid thing is, no one EVER acknowledges they're wrong, or even that they HEARD vegan activists telling them that, why no, these shoes aren't leather. And no, I don't eat hamburgers. Animal exploitation is just wrong. We don't eat them, wear them, or abuse them. Do you? Why?

For the record, though, no I do not feel the same sense of hatred for people in leather shoes that I feel for the kind of vapid, selfish, shallow ass who would wear fur. Why? Because so many people eat cows in this country, that no cow died for that leather. They died for the meat industry, and the leather was just part of what was rendered up after. So until people stop eating meat, I do not have the same sense of disgust about leather as I have about fur.

And if you wear fur, by the way, people do, literally, hate you. No one with a heart could ever wear fur. No one. So if you want to tromp around in someone else's fur, then feel it. They hate you. They really do. I do. Lots of people do. No one thinks you look glamorous, or any of the things you might be thinking. They are hating you. Hating your guts out. Really. Don't wanna feel that? Then don't wear fur.