Public support was amazing with petition sheets being filled at an almost alarmingly fast rate – one activist who normally focuses on non-animal rights issues was actually shocked by the level of support from the public. Many people were angered to find out fur was being sold in their city and once again activists were offered coffee by an extra supportive member of the public.
Earlier in the week, campaigners made phone calls to the shop but got no response. Apparently Mook's manager received so many calls from members of the public objecting to the sale of fur (since the last protest) that 'it was becoming disruptive'! Showing his commitment to customer service he began putting the phone down to all his (actual and potential) customers that dared to mention the F(ur) word!
As Mook's manager didn't seem responsive to phone calls activists took the time while they were there to go in and speak to him directly. He immediately became aggressive and started pushing activists around. The campaigners calmly explained their point and left to continue protesting.
The manager saw fit to waste police time, speaking to cops not once, not twice but three times during the protest but to no particular effect apart from putting off potential customers even further from what was already a practically empty shop.
Out of the few people that when in to Mook only a few of them actually bought anything – maybe people have woken up to a Christmas without consumerism or maybe people just don't like the cruel barbaric fur trade and Mook's poky overpriced shop. Whatever it is, it's gotta be a good thing!
Comments
Hide the following 10 comments
Love and Liberation
19.12.2010 01:00
ARUK
Just wanted to say...
19.12.2010 01:23
Activist
Question
19.12.2010 04:50
It's second hand, no money is entering the hands of breeders or fur farmers. Seems silly to have no problem with recycling leather coats and shoes, yet there's a huge issue when it's a rabbit or fox. Is a cow worth less than rabbit?
Curious
Also curious
19.12.2010 09:33
As mentioned no money is entering the hands of breeders and producers of the current fur trade.
Vintage products and antiques were also often made by workers being denied basic rights, working in dangerous and harmful conditions; do we also need to fight these products too? Or do we accept that what is done is done, the past is gone.
For that matter as most metals are recycled endlessly, and gold in particular has gone round and round for millennia, some of the gold in modern items will have been dug by slaves. Coal powered the entire manufacturing process for centuries, miners and pit-ponies died by the thousand extracting that coal. The past is full of injustice to all animals, including human animals, the world we see around us is built on the blood, bones and suffering of the earth's past inhabitants and on the rape of the Earth itself.
Should we not recognise the environmental benefit of recycling old products, howsoever they were made and focus our efforts on fighting injustice that is happening now and trying to prevent future injustice, rather than wasting out time on what is already done.
Revom
@ Curious @Revom Re: Why focus on Vintage
19.12.2010 16:12
It is not a matter of an old product that is no longer produced. Instead its about perpetuating a fashion trend that begins in Vintage retailers and then leads to the sale of new items of fur. As the Vintage items become 'acceptable and fashionable' the sale of new fur rises. Today's new fur is tomorrows Vintage and the circle continues. Many Vintage retailers up and down the UK recognise this and refuse to sell fur.
We are not asking for the fur to be destroyed, many positive uses can be put to it: donations to the homeless as done by groups like PETA (as this does not perpetuate the upmarket fashion trend of using fur), donations to animal shelters to keep animals warm (after all it was their kin the fur was taken from) or used in anti-fur stunts (helping repair some of the damage done by the 'acceptable' image Vintage gives the fur trade). All we ask is it is not paraded around as a middle class fashion statement as this leads directly to the sale of new fur items.
I hope this helps answer your questions.
Animal Rights Cambridge
Homepage: http://animalrightscambridge.webs.com/
Fake fur
19.12.2010 17:10
Leather? Vintage leather? What of that?
Revom
Re: fake fur
19.12.2010 19:23
Animal Rights Cambridge, as the name suggests, is an animal rights group. We oppose the use and abuse of all animals, leather included. However because of the public feeling and specific forms of abuse in the fur industry it is tactically more effective to focus boycott and divestment style campaigns on it than on leather.
Animal Rights Cambridge
Homepage: http://animalrightscambridge.webs.com
Revom, I love it!
19.12.2010 22:27
We should all wear "vintage" ivory and "vintage" rhinoceros horn and "vintage" tortoise shell as well! It's not our fault if that leads to the sale of new poached items.
When we cut the NHS we can use the bodies of the people we don't feel like treating anymore as well - waste not want not!
Rationalisation of cruelty – I love it!
Tory Toff Girl
Interesting debate
20.12.2010 09:09
Wearing vintage fur perpetuates the message that fur is OK and we should be protesting against it, but we do have to ask ourselves what do we do with very long lasting items which are non vegan? We do need to think on this because people are asking quite rightly how do we deal with this stuff?There are thousands of things that will just not diminish quickly. The way I see it is that when you first become veggie/vegan is that many of us chose to wear out things like leather shoes and woolen jumpers OR give them to charity shops. Fur, ivory, bone even wool can be around longer than a normal human lifespan. The blankets I have are 45 years old (a wedding gift to my parents). Personally I think it is best to use items to some good, fur coats will probably make good dog beds or may save a life in a disaster zone. Some people use them as props on demos.
There is also the thought that if we were talking about using things why not things made out of for example Holocaust victims, is it not speciest to use non human animal products but not human ones? The simple answer is scale, the sheer enormity of animal products is overwhelming. The more complex answer is that we live in a society based on animal abuse things were made from animals because it was always thus, people were being pragmatic, the Holocaust was a horrific retrograde step and to make chairs and lampshades from human skin was to horrify, terrify and degrade other humans.There is also the argument that throwing away an old product and then going on to buy a new one is not saving lives. Every product vegan or not requires some environmental destruction i.e the diminishing of habitat for wild beings, pollution and even death.
I am interested in what people think we should do with old animal products which do not wear out quickly. I expect that most of us one day will face having to deal with the possessions of a relative which will include many non vegan things. I suppose the best thing is to give things away but is this passing the buck?
Lynn Sawyer
@ Lynn Sawyer
23.12.2010 20:48
Loonie Lynn is at it again...
Pob