The matter is difficult. Because many brands, large and small, believe it’s possible to talk with radical vegans. It’s worse: they believe they can get along with the vegans’ values, effectively making their wishes come true (via banning fur, certain wool, exotic leather, and more), all while safeguarding their autonomy. It’s not the case: for a brand to give way to these demands, it means giving up one’s independency. And that’s a fact: in just a few days PETA showed three times what their idea of pluralism is when it comes to fashion: hint, they are right, you are wrong, and it’s their way or the highway.
PETA’s three instances
Let’s start with the statements of Ingrid Newkirk, founder of PETA, to BoF. The news source summarizes some results from the vegan organization: many brands gave up fur and are not putting other animal materials up for discussion. The same outlet though, recognizes how vegan alternatives present many criticalities: they are made of plastic, they are costly and low quality. Newkirk isn’t taking a step back. PETA will keep going until fashion stops using all animal materials: “We are here to change the industry”.
Leatherbiz, on the other hand, summarizes the debate held in Germany between an entrepreneur and a representative of PETA. The debate was civil, and the entrepreneur had the chance of showing the dynamics, pros and cons of the evolution the leather industry is undergoing. The antagonist, even after the debate, didn’t change her position in any way: she hopes the footwear industry will stop using materials of animal origin. To close the loop, PETA’s Instagram account published a post where it compares using animal hides to human skin, effectively comparing it to homicide (simply put).
To those believing debating is possible
Large fashion groups claim to explore all possibilities and invest in all opportunities, even just to see the potential in them. It’s their right, therefore, to spend money developing bio-based materials. Many brands have implemented vegan collections: it’s an understandable marketing need. That being said, it’s a mistake to think that it’s possible to please the radical group: they demand more and more and keep on raising the bar. Those that stopped using fur have surely noticed it: they believed the move to be a sustainable sacrifice to get good press and are now facing stores filled with people demanding they also stop using leather, wool, silk. There can be no debate with those oppressing you with their beliefs.
Photo from Shutterstock
Read also:
