|
Post by dizzymoe33 on Jan 8, 2015 18:09:21 GMT
This was emailed to me I don't have a link yet.
|
|
|
Post by HOMETIME on Jan 11, 2015 18:07:40 GMT
I'm not a skier, so I have no idea whether this would be a big deal for practitioners of that sport. I looks great, though. That said, I really hope that when they mention fur, that they mean faux fur. For a whole host or reasons Frida always has and always will be my favourite member of ABBA, but I'd be seriously disappointed if she (above any of them) supported the fur trade.
|
|
|
Post by gogo on Jan 17, 2015 15:31:54 GMT
Unfortunately she does support the farm Kopenhagen Fur. It is real mink.
|
|
|
Post by shoshin on Jan 17, 2015 17:25:50 GMT
Oh dear When I first saw 'A for Agnetha', in the scene where she is escaping her fans the winter coat looked suspiciously luxuriant, but I tried to push it to the back of my mind. Maybe cultural attitudes towards wearing animals as clothing are different in Nordic countries due to the cold climate and hunting/fishing traditions etc? Or would this be a crude stereotype?
|
|
|
Post by lovepigeon on Jan 17, 2015 20:16:12 GMT
I think if it was faux, it would have been specified. I'm uncomfortable that something as banal as this should bring up the fur debate (if there even is one), but it has, and it's a issue I would like to hear Frida's viewpoint on. For someone who has been so vocal about her love of nature and the environment, it is repulsive that she should support and deal with something as primal and unnecessary as the fur industry. Still, as long as nobody cut down any trees or dropped any litter, huh?
As for the suit itself, I don't see what the fuss is about and I'm not entirely sure why she's done it. It's a ski suit. Like any ski suit. It's basically a sleeping bag with bits for your arms and legs. Heaven knows what 'exclusive femininity' is, but I know plenty of guys who'd wear something like this. If it wasn't made from silky rats and posh Italian sheep, that is.
|
|
|
Post by dizzymoe33 on Jan 17, 2015 21:00:21 GMT
Mankind has been wearing fur since the dawn of man. When an animal was hunted the entire animal was used including the fur. There will always be poachers out there killing animals for sport or profit and not for necessity. We can only hope to stop the sport hunters and poachers. The Eskimos and other cultures that live in cold/harsh climates have to use fur because that is what they have access to, its not like they can run out to the nearest REI store to buy a Winter jacket. It is what keeps them warm enough to survive, plus their cultures have always used all of the animal to survive. Personally I won't judge a person for wearing fur or not. A person can love animals and still consume meat and wear fur. This whole argument is like talking about religion, it comes down to a personal choice or belief. Frida shouldn't be persecuted because she supports a company that properly processes fur. The ones to be persecuted are the ones who are out there killing for fun of killing or money!
|
|
|
Post by chelseacharger on Jan 17, 2015 23:40:44 GMT
It's certainly an emotive subject and a lot more so than decades ago. I don't think we'd have to search to long to find pictures of all the ABBA members in fur coats. Like smoking on camera it just wasn't such a big deal back then. Maybe there is a different attitude from those brought up in the harsh winters of the Nordic or Alpine regions. Personally, I couldn't and wouldn't wear fur but then countless millions of turkeys, geese and other wildfowl have recently met an untimely end to their captivation to meet the demands of Christmas and Thanksgiving. We are told that humans in the modern age can survive very well without meat too so as not a vegetarian (although increasingly heading that way) I can't be selective on what animals whose treatment I would deplore.
|
|
|
Post by lovepigeon on Jan 18, 2015 2:04:09 GMT
Personally I won't judge a person for wearing fur or not. Good for you. Neither will I, if the garment in question is old enough to have been made when real fur was the only viable option. Its like ivory. If Benny (fo example) were to buy an antique piano, fine, but if he bought a brand new piano with ivory keys made from an elephant killed in the last ten years or so, he'd be judged to hell and back, and rightly too. Although why you'd judge someone for not wearing fur is beyond me. This whole argument is like talking about religion No, it's not. Frida shouldn't be persecuted because she supports a company that properly processes fur. It's not persecution. Far from it. It's calling someone out on supporting something that does not need (or warrant) supporting in this day and age, when they have in the past been vocal in their support of environmental issues. She even recorded a song about it. The ones to be persecuted are the ones who are out there killing for fun of killing or money! Like the people who took money to provide the fur for this ski suit. It may be 'humane', but they are killing for vanity and nothing else. Unlike meat alternatives, faux fur is cheap to produce (and to produce well). There is no reason or excuse to use real fur on this. I am a Frida fan. Always will be. It's just that I can't kid myself that using real fur in 2014/15 for something as superfluous as a ski suit is an okay decision just because it's Frida. Sure, there are cultures where wearing fur is a necessity, but those people kill to survive and have no other means. Eskimos don't ski in Zermatt.
|
|
|
Post by shoshin on Jan 18, 2015 2:16:36 GMT
Your avatar looks like s/he might have an opinion on this one Monica
|
|
|
Post by dizzymoe33 on Jan 18, 2015 17:18:05 GMT
I am just curious how many out there are wearing some form of leather right now, like your shoes, jackets, vests, skirts, bras, wallets, hats or even Eel skin wallets? Hahaha Martin UK, my avatar was having fun with the camera
|
|
|
Post by lovepigeon on Jan 18, 2015 18:56:53 GMT
Leather is, by and large, a by-product of the meat industry. Very expensive or very soft leather can be a bit iffy but that's not my bag (literally). With mid-range genuine leather products (ie: high street stuff), you can rest easy that the skin you're wearing or using is simply being put to use rather than wasted. Killing to eat is just the way life is. We as human beings are born to eat meat, just as dogs and cats are. Obviously many people opt out of this, but there are nowhere near enough affordable or viable alternatives to make a meat-free society at all feasible.
Killing to eat is a necessity of life. Killing for vanity and killing for sport are most certainly not. There is absolutely no excuse for either in this day and age.
|
|
|
Post by gogo on Jan 18, 2015 18:58:41 GMT
Personally I think there is a big difference between killing an animal and using everything it has to offer or killing an animal for fashion only. If the fur is a byproduct (like leather often is) – okay. If it is the only reason – no.
Another criteria is how an animal is brought up and killed. In the case of mink farms it is pure pain and horror!!! Calling this a religious question is (sorry!) sort of ignorant.
|
|
|
Post by shoshin on Jan 18, 2015 19:33:19 GMT
|
|
|
Post by chelseacharger on Jan 18, 2015 19:47:10 GMT
Without going to far off topic, studies have shown that meat production, especially of beef, is very inefficient. Yes, in certain parts of the world the rearing of animals for meat consumption is a necessity of simple survival. In the affluent countries it certainly isn't. It is estimated that for beef cattle 18 pounds of grain is needed for each pound of beef produced. And this grain is only a fattening supplement to their main diet of grass and other roughage. These cattle therefore require vast areas of land for feed. So basically there is a requirement for double the space needed. Land for the cattle and land for the production of the grain to boost their bulk. Huge swathes of the Amazon basin are being cleared yearly for this very purpose. And for what? Our own liking, not necessity, to consume beef in the developed countries. Beef was once a treat on a Sunday. Now for those who frequent fast food joints it's virtually a daily meal even if one can truly say burgers in these establishments are the real deal. I'm going to far off topic, aren't I? The truth is we do live in a cruel world, much of it for our own vanity, comfort and pleasure. Someone who can boast they avoid even leather at all costs maybe not be aware of the child labour and sweatshops in the third world that all to often produce alternative synthetic footwear on top of clothes and other things we take for granted. Like I say, I'd rather there weren't fur farms but I find it a little difficult to pick and choose what to be offended by.
|
|
|
Post by dizzymoe33 on Jan 19, 2015 19:38:53 GMT
shoshin, that is exactly what my point was when I mentioned "religion" in my statement. I am not trying to change anyone's views here.
|
|
|
Post by gogo on Jan 20, 2015 15:55:53 GMT
Ok, if the pros and cons of killing are of a religious nature – then amen. I, for my part, believe in the spririt of Enlightenment.
|
|
|
Post by dizzymoe33 on Feb 1, 2015 17:09:10 GMT
|
|
|
Post by meandi on Feb 1, 2015 20:10:02 GMT
The Matterhorn is 4478 meters high, the woman standing at the foot of the mountain, the summit: Anni-Frid Lyngstad (69), loved by the world as "Frida" pop group ABBA Swedish. There is probably no bathroom between hammer party and Tierra del Fuego into which still no Abba hit was penetrated(insisted). So much to Frida's past. If we look now in the present(presence) which is always also a mix from past and future. Frida who emits a great rest says with look at the mountain: "The Matterhorn has cured me and to me my big(great) pain(ache) about the loss of my man in 1999 genommen." 15 years ago she(it) came the first time after Cerium-weakly, one of 8000 villagers was the singer Dan Daniel (53), born as a son of a Schafzüchters. With Dan she took up(accepted) nature in herself. \"Everything in me fell silent \", says Frida. If a buzzsaw(circular saw) had jumped(started) somewhere, she would not have perceived them(her). Frida heard only rest. Also the bustle around ABBA which drowned her half a life was not in Cerium-weakly sometimes more a rushing "Here there are no fans. Here there are only people, honestly(fairly) with you mine", says Frida. This rest does not want to disturb her - only quietly appreciate. On the 13th of February a piano ballad of Frida and Daniell appears \"in 1865 \" to the 150th jubilee of the first ascent of the Matterhorn. Happy Birthday to you.
|
|
|
Post by dizzymoe33 on Feb 2, 2015 20:10:08 GMT
^^Thanks for the translation
|
|
|
Post by dizzymoe33 on Feb 12, 2015 18:24:17 GMT
|
|