Written by PETA
Update 12/22/2008: Donna Karan has announced that her fall 2009 lines will be fur-free and that she has "no plans" to use fur in the future! Read more.
I'm not quite sure what Sag Harbor Village, New York—a self-proclaimed "spiritually oriented" town—is thinking by welcoming Donna Karan into their peace circle. But they have, and they are allowing her to set up shop near the wharf. So amongst the yoga shops and raw-food eateries, there will soon be Urban Zen, DK's yoga-inspired store, which plans to sell DK's fashions, amongst other things. Catch the details here.
The nagging question on deck is: Why would someone so relentless in the promotion of fur and the killing of innocent animals for their skins have any interest in associating herself with yoga and its quintessential beliefs? One just doesn't seem to go with the other. Yoga is, after all, a spiritual awakening and a practice of love and nonviolence. (Forgive me for getting all "hippie" on you, but it is.)
Somehow, I just don't think the practice of yoga will cleanse the karma of a desperate, bunny-butchering fashion designer who continues to use real fur in her collections when there are so many great alternatives out there. There's no violence in yoga, DK. And there definitely isn't any peace for animals who are skinned alive and anally electrocuted for your clothes. However, we do have a suggestion for you to turn your bad karma good: Stop killing animals! I know, you've never heard that before, right?
Posted by Jennifer Cierlitsky, Membership Correspondence Coordinator
The guy’s leading the charge to invigorate global warming advocacy, he’s consistently getting attention for the issue in the mainstream media, and he’s setting the agenda by which people think about global warming and its effect on our lives. So why the hell is PETA publicly rebuking him? Well, honestly, it’s for pretty much those same reasons. It’s great that he cares —; it really is — but for him to leave factory farming (i.e., the number one cause of the problem in the first place) out of the debate just because it doesn’t seem particularly convenient to him to have to reevaluate his lifestyle is irresponsible to a degree that’s almost unfathomable in light of the influence that he has on public opinion about this issue.
Of course, if you’ve been reading this blog more or less regularly, you will have already heard variations on this theme—but I’m bringing it up again today to highlight a really fantastic article by PETA Vice President Bruce Friedrich in yesterday’s Huffington Post. Here’s an excerpt:
“Personal choices can only be allowed to go so far. For example, most environmentalists would agree that people shouldn't have the personal choice to dump their motor oil in a river. And if our choices involve direct support for the number one human cause of global warming—and a refusal to even mention the meat industry when telling people what they can do to decrease their global-warming footprint—at what point is someone's oversight on such a crucial issue cause for publicly calling them out on it?”
I think Bruce nails it with this one, so be sure to check out the full article here, and feel free to comment with your perspective. I know this issue’s a bit controversial, but it’s a vitally important discussion to have.
you have a general question for PETA and would like a response, please e-mail Info@peta.org. If you need to report cruelty to
an animal, please click
here. If you are reporting an animal in imminent danger and know where to find the
animal and if the abuse is taking place right now, please call your local
police department. If the police are unresponsive, please call PETA
immediately at 757-622-7382 and press 2.
Follow PETA on Twitter!
Almost all of us grew up eating meat, wearing leather, and going to circuses and zoos. We never considered the impact of these actions on the animals involved. For whatever reason, you are now asking the question: Why should animals have rights? Read more.