Tuesday, October 19

Wear the mink proudly!

On NPR I heard about The Lure of an Inherited Mink, where a woman asked their idiotic ethicist about a mink coat.
I'm a baby boomer who has been pretty instinctively politically correct for most of my life, but I've also come to really enjoy the finer things as I'm pushing 60 here. So I'm kind of torn between the idea of having this beautiful coat and my guilt stemming from my support of PETA, you know, through my whole life. So how do I direct my thinking, Randy?
How about stopping to support PETA? Failing that, get rid of the mink, hypocrite!

Then the annoyingly pc ethicist Randy Cohen responds,
...we both agree that you shouldn't wear a new fur coat, that you could really make a moral case that one ought not do that?....And I think we could make a case that for some exploitation of animals, that there are many people who would argue that animal food is important or that we might exploit animals for medical research where there's not a meaningful alternative and where their suffering is minimized....I think we can agree there's no justification for harming animals to produce something as frivolous as a fur coat, and you needn't be a vegetarian to think that. Even if you're not willing to make the leap to vegetarianism, even if you can't do everything, you can do something. So I would advocate--I don't think it's hypocritical. I think it's a position of moderation to say you shouldn't wear a new coat....So then is an old fur coat different? Should it be, you know, grandfathered in, or cousined in in your case, because it does--as Jennifer said, we harm no new animal. And I would say, no, that you should not wear even an old fur coat because appearing in that fur announces that doing so is acceptable, you know, unless you shave a slogan in its back, 'Old fur,' 'Gift from rich cousin,' that kind of thing.
But if wearing fur is bad, it's bad.
I would argue that while wearing an old fur certainly doesn't injure any animals, but it injures us; that it coarsens our sensibilities when it declares our values that says this is OK. And I think you seem to think that, or you wouldn't have that lingering feeling of guilt....[H]ere's my guideline for old fur--is that utility without propaganda; that is, if you can find ways to use it that don't advertise its use to other people, that's fine, that you might make it a fur throw in your bedroom...
The woman, who's been agreeing with Randy all along, loves his solution:
Of course I know it's not right to wear it. Of course I would never buy it. But the circumstances here, you know, made it really sort of appealing. But I think I will respect Randy's response. It's a good one.
The anchor Jennifer Ludden steps in here to ask a key question:
Well--so, Randy, are you going to be donating your leather shoes?
His answer:
No. Again, I'm not preaching absolutism here; I'm preaching moderation and that because we aren't willing to give up all animal products doesn't mean we ought not give up the particularly frivolous ones.
Sheesh. Leather is made from animals just as mink coats are! If one believes wearing fur is wrong, so is wearing leather, and there are "meaningful alternatives" to leather. And how does wearing mink coarsen our sensiblities any more than leather? I believe this is prejudice against the wealthy. In any event, Cohen's "final solution" as PETA might say is to donate the fur to an animal rights group that uses old furs that they shred and use as bedding in programs that rescue orphaned animals in the wild. The woman says she'll go along with that, although I believe there's a good chance she'll keep it for herself.

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

Good for her!