by Michael dEstries
Categories: Animals, Causes.

Husband and wife team, Duff McKagan (Bassist for Gun N’ Roses) and Susan Holmes McKagan have stripped down for a new anti-fur PETA Ad.

The tattoo-heavy pair proudly show off their bods for the “Ink, Not Mink” campaign. “I think we should know better than that,” Susan told PETA. “Whether you’re a designer or a celebrity, or a stylist, a photographer, I think everyone should share responsibility in bringing more awareness that, hey, [fur’s] not necessary, it’s out of fashion, it’s completely immoral to the animals.”

Check out their video interview after the jump below.

About Michael dEstries

Michael has been blogging since 2005 on issues such as sustainability, renewable energy, philanthropy, and healthy living. He regularly contributes to a slew of publications, as well as consulting with companies looking to make an impact using the web and social media. He lives in Ithaca, NY with his family on an apple farm.

View all posts by Michael dEstries →
  • Barb Olson

    Did I miss something? Last I saw published about Duff McKagan in regards to GNR, he did a GUEST appearance at the O2 in London. Shouldn’t that be FORMER GNR bassist, or more politely, Bassist Duff McKagan of GNR, Velvet Revolver, etc… fame did all that.

  • Bob

    PETA can blow me.

  • Bob

    Things you can be infected with from getting a tattoo: gangrene, syphilis, TB, hepatitis B and C, and HIV.

    Things you can be infected with from wearing a fur: none. And it’s environmentally friendly, feels great, and keeps you warm.

    Think about it boys and girls.

    • don miguelo

      You’ll only get those things if you are a moron and don’t go to a reputable tattoo parlor where they don’t use new ink bottles every client, new needles (duh), or don’t know how to tattoo correctly, etc. Some hospital clinics were found to be not using new needles and were infecting the patients with all those things too– should no one ever go to a hospital again? By your point they shouldn’t. Watch what they do in a hospital and a tattoo parlor, research them a bit, and one can easily avoid it.

      An analogy is only as strong as the similarity of the items being compared, like how well they correspond on several layers, not just on one flippant remark. Your comparison of tattoos to fur is just deperately trying to guide people’s thinking with a memorable soundbyte. Hey, you asked us to ‘think about it’.

      Arguably, when humans were were within the circle of life hunting and gathering for their living, fur was a useful material that was harvested with a measure of respect and sustainably. That’s not how it is anymore and you and I both know it. Today there are way too many of us overrunning animal’s habitats and we buy mass produced crap, drive cars, dump our landfills into the ocean, etc. It’s not ‘environmentally friendly’ to have a fur farm that creates tons of animal waste when much better materials have been made that can be produced with much less affect on the environment.

      Besides, fur CAN give you a disease- VANITY. How’s that for a memorable soundbyte?

      • T

        Very well said, Don!! Of course, coming up with something intelligent to say in comparison to whatever THAT was supposed to be (above yours) probably wasn’t too difficult for you! BTW…bob, people that request for everyone to do things to them surely aren’t getting anyone to do it!!

      • Ponygirl

        Bravo Don!!

      • mark

        Great insights! You analyse problems very well. You must be doing great at school kid…

        Fur is essential for people living in very cold places. Sure if your wearing a mink coat in LA your a fool. Not because your wearing fur, but because you’d be so god damned hot, and maybe a little but ostentatiousness. But in minus 30 temperatures, fur is far superior than any synthetic material. Long live fur and warmth.

      • georgina

        Fur is only essential to those animals that wear it, not for humans.

      • David

        Explain that to the Inuit, georgina.

        And did you know that fruit is essential for trees to propagate their species but it isn’t essential for humans?

        Think of all the seeds that get eaten or just thrown away by uncaring humans every day. Save a tree, eat a cow.

    • Christopher Boos

      Wow! Bob, after your first intellectual bombshell there, I didn’t think you would have any more ammo. But, just ten minutes later, BAM!

      Out of curiosity, how exactly do you define “environmentally friendly” Bobbo?

  • herwin

    Awsome poster, classic campaign of Peta. Great to see that mr Duff and wify join Peta in this campaign and donate their time and energy.
    Keep up the good work, girls and boys.

  • Vote_for_Pedro

    Mark- you are oh so wrong!! Do a lil research on this topic buddy boy.
    “Even in cold and snowy weather, faux fur jackets with appropriate padding and lining are likely to provide adequate warmth. The only areas on earth where fur MIGHT be necessary are the extreme North, as in Alaska and Siberia, and the extreme South, as in the Antarctic continent. Even in these areas, new synthetic materials are often preferred to fur”.

    • David

      Nice cut and paste Pedro, but what about the sentence just before you started your cut?

      Let me help you out by posting it for you.

      “The best faux fur tends to be made of fine acrylic fibers. Acrylic can be dyed to represent the colors and patters of real animals. Faux fur can give a certain amount of warmth to a garment, but it will not be as warm as real fur.”

      Oh gee Pedro – you are oh so wrong!!! Do a lil research on this topic buddy boy. Oh wait you did a lil research but ignored the part you didn’t like. Real fur doesn’t require that padding and lining that faux fur does.

      Seems Mark was right and you were wrong. You really shouldn’t post a link to a site if you don’t want people to read your whole source and not just your carefully selected portion.

  • Vote_for_Pedro

    If I didnt want people to read the whole post I wouldnt have posted the link Dumbass!! And what you selected was from a completely different paragraph from what I posted. Further more, Nothing was cut from the info I posted. Perhaps some reading comprehension classes are in order for you. Im sure you qualify for the welfare!
    All I was simply proving is that while real fur (who is designed to be worn by the animals god gave it to) may be warmer to some, it is NOT the only option.. so you have to put some padding and lining it.. big deal! Pad your jacket.. save a life.. sounds like an easy soluton.

    • David

      You’re the one that posted the link to an article, not a paragraph but an article, and that article contradicts what you said Mark was wrong about. So who has the reading comprehension problem?

      And the article doesn’t say that real fur is warmer to some, it says real fur is warmer, period, end of sentence. So you weren’t even proving what you claim to be proving.

      And if god designed the fur to be worn by animals didn’t god also design man to have the skill and knowledge to harvest the fur from those animals?

      And what about those poor people on welfare that don’t have the money to afford padding and lining? I guess you just want them to freeze. Not surprising since you seem to look down on people on welfare, why else would you use it as a slur?

    • georgina

      HAHA…somebody here just made a funny.

      If someone cannot afford something as cheap as lining and padding they that someone will not be able to afford fur for sure.

      • David

        HAHA…somebody who lied and said they don’t understand sarcasm just used it again.

        And I bet there are a lot of native groups living in the far north and south of our planet that can’t afford something as cheap as lining or padding but are able to afford fur.

        So you might want to reconsider what you are sure about.

  • Pingback: NFL Star Willis McGahee Goes Naked For PETA | :: the latest in green gossip()