Debate rages over fur as fashion

Kirk Baird

Tuesday, Jan. 16, 2001 | 8:59 a.m.

Got fur?

Many leading fashion magazines seem to think so.

Vogue, in its October issue, proclaimed fur the "look of the moment," with an 18-page pictorial on fur fashions -- everything from coats and skirts to jeans to boots. And Mode recently devoted a page to fur (both real and faux) in its Fashion Forward section.

And fur's popularity extends to fur-trimmed boots, sandals, baseball caps and brassieres -- even bedspreads and throw pillows are available in fur.

Obviously, the newfound attention translates into bigger sales.

Danna Geller, director of fashion promotions for the Fur Information Council of America, said fur sales in 1999 increased more than 15 percent to $1.4 billion up from $1.21 billion in 1998. This follows an overall trend last decade, following a decline in the mid-'80s.

And the fashion industry has taken notice, she said. More than 300 designers are today using fur compared with 1985, when only 42 designers incorporated fur into their creations.

"It's a wonderful fabric to work with," Geller said. "It's a renewable resource, it keeps you warm and is very fashionable."

She said the appeal is mainly to women age 24 to 44, who account for the majority of fur sales.

And in that respect, Michelle Stephenson, 28, fits right in.

Stephenson, who moved to Las Vegas three years ago from Seattle, owns three fur coats and one leather jacket with fur trim.

"I've been accumulating them over 10 years," she said. "I wear it because I like the look of it and it makes me feel special."

But it's that kind of attitude that makes members of People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals and other animal rights groups cringe.

PETA began a crusade against wearing fur 20 years ago. Part of the tactics involved in its war against the fur industry include passing out anti-fur literature, confrontational protests and an ad campaign consisting of "nude" celebrities and models with the line, "I'd Rather Go Naked Than Wear Fur."

Then there's the controversial practice of splashing red paint -- to symbolize the blood of the animal -- on someone wearing fur, often as they walk out a of furrier. Though a method not endorsed by the organization, Dan Mathews, PETA's director of campaigns, said he understands such methods.

"It doesn't bother me at all," Mathews said from the organization's headquarters in Norfolk, Va. "It's not the way I choose to deal with the issue, but I certainly understand why people feel driven to go to such extremes."

When asked if he felt such actions prove more harmful to PETA's cause than helpful in terms of public opinion, Mathews said that wasn't the case. He likened PETA's stance to a social movement, one that may not always meet with popular opinion.

"Although people may not agree with the tactics, you can't argue it's put the issue on the table," he said.

But Mabel Murray, owner Trudi Furs n' Leather in Las Vegas, said the public has grown weary of such methods -- especially the destruction of property.

"When PETA went to extremes, it was the worst thing that could have happened," Murray said. "It's OK to have an opinion, but not to harm other people's stuff."

She said fur's return to fashion prominence is due in part because "people don't like to be told what to do," coupled with a booming economy. Then there's the fact, she said, that there's nothing else like it.

"The only woman who doesn't like fur, is one who's never had one," Murray said.

Linda Faso, an independent animal rights activist in Las Vegas, has reason to disagree.

A former owner of a full-length ranch mink coat, she was handed a piece of anti-fur literature 12 years ago. After reading it, Faso still wasn't convinced the fur industry was as bad as the flier claimed, so she did some investigative work, including making a trip to a local furrier. She then decided that she no longer wanted to wear fur and donated the coat to PETA for use in education programs in schools.

"Since then I've been an advocate for what it is all about," Faso said. "I guess I learned the hard way."

Now she participates in "Fur Free Friday," an annual anti-fur protest on the Friday after Thanksgiving -- considered the biggest shopping day of the year -- outside the Nieman Marcus store at Fashion Show mall. Last year's demonstration drew 45 participants.

"We bring out our signs -- and some are pretty graphic -- and hand out literature, discuss the issue of fur and just let the public know there are those who are opposed to it," Faso said. "We ask people to choose something else in place of fur. We find that the majority of people are receptive."

One of the options is faux fur. For some, however, it's simply no substitute.

"Fake fur is expensive and doesn't clean as well," Murray said. "It's not the same -- it doesn't feel the same or look the same."

And promoting fake fur, which is made of synthetics, is not in keeping with PETA's stance of relying on organic materials, said Teresa Platt, executive director of Fur Commission USA.

"A faux fur is inorganic and man-made," Platt said. "It will be with you 600 years -- it's not biodegradeable. If they want to promote that product and use that to clothe six billion people, then it's a problem.

"Fur in the long run is coming out ahead. There's a reason it's been here all along."

But you'll never convince Mathews of a need to wear fur.

"There's absolutely no reason whatsoever, or justification," he said. "It's a relic from the time when people were uneducated about the hideous cruelty and horrible trail of blood behind any fur coat."