Protesting Kylie Jenner’s Use of Fur Doesn’t Help Animals
Another day, another useless anti-fur protest makes the news.
TMZ had the gossip on a recent run in Kylie Jenner had with some confused welfarists. At the grand opening of Sugar Factory in Vegas this past weekend, the infamous celebrity was bum-rushed on the red carpet by a mob of laminated photo carrying activists. Although Kylie’s fuzzy jacket could have been real or faux animal fur (she’s been seen in both), the throng of animal advocates supposedly cut her photo-op short by shouting about the blood on her hands.
No mention of any leather, wool, or silk products in her clothing. None of the lanolin or beeswax in her beauty products. And who cares what she had for dinner, right? Or will everyone begin protesting the more “mundane” animal uses once all the Kardashian’s clan members have given up fur first? Which celebrity will be the next baby step?
Campaigns against fur, whether that’s at the PETA level or a small mobbing like this, don’t work because they promote the use of other animal products. When the focus is honed in on one use, it’s perceived as being a worse or more immoral use than the countless others. But using animals to make a jacket is no more frivolous or inconsiderate than using an animal for a snack; neither are necessary. So when a non-vegan hears of Kylie’s run in, they can take away that she’s wrong for wearing fur and they’re right because they don’t.
While we can suppose that these advocates have good intentions, they’re negatively continuing the prevailing welfarist symphony that seems to swirl around all animals rights conversations these days. But for there to be real rights for all animals, they have to be given freedom from all use, not just the flashiest, most expensive, most in-your-face version of it. Getting one celebrity to denounce fur won’t have as much impact as making one person vegan.
Veganism and promoting an objection to all animal use equally is the only hope animals have. Asking for any less sells animals short.