apartment therapy changing the world, one room at a time

posted originally from AT:New York

Re-purposed does not equal guilt free any more than consumption can equal thrift. Being crafted from something already made does not obviate feelings of fur-guilt, for me; additionally, I'm always conflicted about non-necessary consumer goods being celebrated as green/consumption conscious. "Green" should be about being aware of not just what we consume but also how much in general. I think the repurposing of one's own heirlooms is green, but buying a new set of pillows recrafted from someone else's old stole is just plain ol' consumption.

Or maybe I'm just cranky (again) today.


Italics added from my orig. comment, because I think it's worth discussing here on AT:Green. I'm not saying that all furs in existance should be trashed rather than re-used, I'm just saying that we probably should think about the balance, on AT:Green, between simply consuming a new thing because hey, it *feels* "green" to buy recycled stuff, and consuming better because it *is* "green" to not buy, to replace broken or wasteful with better (like light bulbs), to re-make our own possessions into new things (I've got old moth-eaten cashmere in the sewing basket now, on its way to being a scarf).

Oh and, to cut off at the pass the counter argument that "I can't sew a pillow, I can't make a scarf out of my old stuff, can't I buy one that I really want from someone who made one out of their old stuff?"--why not hire the crafting portion out to a friend or associate? Then you're not buying a new thing at all; you're buying the labour that you can't provide but using the materials that you can.

I guess I got more steamed about this pillow thing than I thought, yesterday. And I will follow this post around the entire AT universe for comments, if I need to! It's a discussion worth having.

I understand your point Nora, The North American culture is very consumer and 'want' based. We don't need a lot of stuff and not buying things we don't need is probably the greenest thing to do. But you also have to remember that Apartment therapy is a website that highlights designers, designers selling stuff.

Ultimately people (in general) are going to buy stuff, theres a cultural bias for it. But if these people start buying things that have been made from recycled materials (such as all of Harricana's products) than it is at least a step in the right direction

i've always had a generally icked-out reaction to real fur. but how is hiring a friend to do the sewing any different than buying it from someone who already makes them? you'd just be hiring someone you don't know to do it. that fur is sitting in disuse somewhere, whether it came from my closet or the designer's closet. no difference.

it's fun to do stuff yourself (or to have a friend do it) but that doesn't make it better for the environment.

the truth is, i think that if you have a problem with recycled/repurposed fur, then you should also abstain from leather, used or otherwise. there isn't really a difference in their environmental impact. the difference is in our comfort level, which is a valid concern but is not reason enough to comdemn the use of fur.

i should clarify my above comment:

making something yourself is often better for the environment, but that is not an automatic thing and should not be taken for granted.

@muro.lamere: "but how is hiring a friend to do the sewing any different than buying it from someone who already makes them? you'd just be hiring someone you don't know to do it.

It's different because I actually suggested, maybe not as clearly as I meant, that one send one's own heirloom furs out for pillowfication, rather than buying other pillows made of non-owned by the buyer (therefore brand new to the buyer) fur.

"I think that if you have a problem with recycled/repurposed fur, then you should also abstain from leather, used or otherwise."

We are in agreement.

"making something yourself is often better for the environment, but that is not an automatic thing and should not be taken for granted."

A very good point, here. Since developing as a conscious consumer is a process, we do need to analyse our choices often, even (especially?) those we hold as true.

is buying my clothes at a thrift store wrong because whatever i purchase is new to me? i guess i'm inclined to think that reused material is reused material. i don't have a problem with someone sending out their own heirloom furs for professional repurposing (cool potential business plan, actually!) but i don't think that it's any better, save the sentimental value, than buying the pillows featured in this post.

Yeeeah, I am just not behind anything that thinks fur belongs "out in the open" - sorry! There is nothing green about breeding/capturing animals for their pelts - that's a lot of resources going into a wearable panel (not to mention sickeningly inhumane).

The best way to reuse fur is to donate it back to the animals.

There is nothing green about breeding/capturing animals for their pelts - that's a lot of resources going into a wearable panel (not to mention sickeningly inhumane). <-- I meant to imply that you can't tell the diff between new and old fur and it being tolerated ups its acceptance...and the supply/demand is continued.

Fur has no place in the home, except upon companion animals. I am really disappointed at the number of AT posts about leather and fur, and especially on the Green site. Blech. I am tired of exploitative practices that are endorsed by consumers. Would the same person skin her pet dog and make a pillow out of it? If she felt like a pimp, that's because she is--she exploits animals to make a fashion statement. And so did her aunt.

SkippyB,

I hope you are vegetarian! If you are, I would agree that you believe you are right in your opinion.

Using furs as bedding for animals or destitute humans is still accepting that animal products can be used for human purposes. In this case, keeping people warm and the humans' need to prolong the life of animals in cages.

It would be more of a statement if Peta incinerated the fur and held a "funeral" (symbolic) for the dead animals.

Well, I think the "bedding" is more for wildlife being rehabbed rather than just dog blankets for domestic animals. Every fur-donation for the animals I've seen references wildlife rehab and using it presumably to provide a comfort zone for the animal and to prohibit young orphaned wildlife from bonding to humans, making it impossible to release them.

I think Peta's stance on the homeless population fur donations is more to lower fur's status than to actually clothe humans so their intention is most likely the opposite of how you interpreted it.

I think that they're trying to channel older fur into those channels so they're not seen as "wasting" it. Overall, I'd prefer never to see it on anything but the animal who owned it!