It was interesting to read in the ‘Echo’ the other day an article referring to a fur amnesty.
The vegan Wool supporters were asking for people to give up their fur coats.
If this group truly believe that we should all wear man-made fibres, then why are they giving the surrendered furs to the rough sleepers?
If this is because with the cold weather is coming, then I would have thought that blankets would be more beneficial.
Oh of course not wool ones.
So furs worn by those less fortunate than ourselves do not come under the same category as those very same furs they wish us to donate under the ‘amnesty’.
Can they then explain the double standards?
In reality, anyway, pelts made into fashionable wear that are years old were tailored long before the currant PC era.
Only those today should be banned as representing ‘animal cruelty’, some beaver skin overcoat made in the 1930s, how can that be classed as offensive?
I am sure there are some elderly ladies today who still posses such coats, should they be persecuted for wearing a coat that is quite possibly sentimental to them?
ALVIN L HOPPER
Weymouth
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel