Jen and I have been talking about it lately, and I've certainly contributed to enough to the blogs I admire to make me wonder what I'd do if I had one on my own. Would it help me avoid becoming the Stedman Graham of Generation X?
[And on that note, a quick Stedman/Jen story. So, Jen was interviewing Stedman a few years ago, back when he was promoting his book about the "nine steps" to success. "Was step one 'Get Married To Oprah'?" Jen asked. The interview ended soon after.]
Back to me, which is the point of this thing. So, I saw an article in today's
"Six or seven years ago there was sort of a reference to political correctness, not wearing fur," Mr. Kaplan [spokesman for the fur industry] said. "But it's not considered politically correct to dictate what other people should eat or wear, especially after 9/11. People don't want to be told, and they don't respect those tactics anymore."
Emphasis mine, and, um, excuse me? One can certainly ascribe any number of changes to the American character since that tragedy -- we are more patriotic; more appreciative of the efforts of our armed forces, police and fire departments; more conscious of the rest of the world, and more conscious of our need to be engaged with it. But more fur wearing, less vegan? Yikes. Talk about a rhetorical hijacking. This is on the level of those unfortunate Jerry Falwell remarks in the tragedy's immediate wake, and without the "benefit" of the heat of the moment to justify its audacity. Shame on the Fur Information Council.
I am not vegan, not vegetarian, not even, necessarily, anti-fur. I'm undecided. I do like what PETA's doing here: by donating used furs to the homeless, not only does it keep them warm during the winter but also might help transform the social meaning of fur-wearing from an elite, luxurious act to something less glamorous, less distinctive. Just another way to keep warm. We shall see.
No comments:
Post a Comment