Ending the Fur Trade !

New York is about to enact a city ordinance that will ban the sale of new clothing that contains the fur of an animal and that will join similar laws in force in both Los Angeles and San Francisco.  A very vocal minority have been agitating for years for a fur ban on the grounds that it is cruel to raise animals for slaughter for their fur and in many cases those hunted for the clothing trade are from the endangered list.

In Australia, the garment industry steers clear of fur because of similar rejections but fur in America had wider appeal because of that country's harsh winters and the fact that certain fur types were regarded as indicators of both wealth and position.   It was the aim of many women to be seen wearing the comfort of a coat made from mink, chinchilla or lynx.

That raises the issue of " faux fur ".  A few years ago the garment industry tried a new approach by introducing a limited fur look with the claim that the fur was artificial and therefore no animal was harmed.  In fact it was quickly proved that the fur was imported from China and it came from a flourishing trade in dogs and cats.  Not only were dogs and cats impounded as strays killed for their fur but stealing pets from family homes was rife.

These American city ordinances leave a little wriggle room.  Shops could still sell second hand fur items and  the law does not preclude the owner of a fur garment from wearing it openly in the street. Unfortunately in this modern day and age people who do just that are open to a physical attack. It is not unusual for fur activists to throw dye or even paint to illustrate their opposition to fur.

Strangely, this opposition to fur seems specifically aimed at women.  The cowboy look some men copy calls for calfskin jackets with the fur side exposed and the leather jacket is winter attire for men across the whole world.  Clothing made from the skin of a pig is both fashionable and very practical and there seems no movement to impose a ban based on the protection of pigs from harm.

This opposition to fur is specifically directed at fur as a fashion item and not at the underlying membrane of leather and the higher the price of the item sold the greater the rage of opponents.   Decades ago it was the sign of financial success if a businessman bought his wife a mink coat.
Today that is becoming a bad taste faux-pas as this opposition to fur steadily expressed its fury.

This New York ordinance calls for fines of up to two thousand dollars for retailers who break the law but there is one market segment where fur still predominates.  Children's toys where fur delivers a comforting feel are still on toy shop shelves and traditionally this use came from the cuttings derived from the fur fashion industry.  As that fashion industry retreats, it would seem to open up a new sales opportunity for faux fur from Asia.

A question that should predominate when we looks to buy toys for our kids !