Jump to content

Fur - How it Touched Me


Guest tom4fur
 Share

Recommended Posts

I never wanted to like fur,I even "protested" against it at a early age.My protest was delt with in a unique way,after my bath I was swathed in the very fur I protested.I tried to resist,I imagined the foxes trying to escape,the mean "fur man" in hot persuit. I had all I could do to hide my "growing" affection for fox fur, then something moved the towel... I felt so guilty because, I WAS SO HAPPY THE MEAN "FUR MAN" CAUGHT THOSE FOXES! I love REAL fur for many reasons,BUT I love to see women in furs, I find it sensual,sexy,wild,and beautiful.I also think it's amusing that I (male) feel sorry for the poor animals as the pro fur ladies just enjoy there furs!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let me put this straight before I even start, lest I be accused of telling somebody they are wrong for thier feelings. You have the right to feel the way you feel. You can like or dislike fur simply because you make up your mind to do so. I am not telling you that your feelings are invalid.

 

But I would like to point out another way of looking at this to you.

 

Do you cry about the "Hamburger Man" when you eat at McDonalds or Burger King?

 

Do you cry about the "Rib Man" when you have a pork rib barbecue in your back yard?

 

It is easy to empathize with foxes because they are supposedly "cute and furry" little creatures. It's not so easy to empathize with a big, smelly cow or filthy pig.

 

Taking a fox for its fur or butchering a pig for its meat are the same thing.

 

You, as a child, probably sat at the dinner table, happily munching on a plate full of "chicken fingers" without a second thought.

 

So, why do you worry about the fox when 1,000,000 more pigs and chickens and cows are used for their meat and leather every day?

 

I do not take the thought of killing a fox for its fur to be any less important than you do but you also have to put things into perspective.

 

If hamburgers were cute and furry would kids cry about them, too?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Welcome, tom. It's perfectly okay to wear fur, enjoy seeing women in fur, and even massaging those wet 'privates' with fur! Most of us have done all those things at one time or another.

 

Let go of the guilt. That's nothing but a waste of your emotions. Go out and get yourself the sexist fox you can find. There are plenty on eBay!

 

FLinFL

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know how to describe this feeling. The sympathy and pang of guilt I feel for the animals that are" transformed"into a woman's fur is part of the turn on.I like it!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fur has always touched me to the extent that I will always love fur for its beauty, soft, sensous warm feel. It doesnt really matter to me that alot of the animals were killed for it. I just take it from the perspective that, thats what the animans were bread for, for us to use thier fur for us to keep warm with. Its a valuable resource thats there for us. It is what takes to make a fur coat for all of us. Fur has touched me in sooo many ways more than just the fashion perspective. I love it for it, fur, just every thing about it. Just something that I will always love for the rest of my life. I still would love to have my own place one day with dozens and dozens of furs in my future house that I could just completely burry every inch of my body in totally surrounded in fur 100%.

 

-Fur...... -How It Touched Me-

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's very easy for people to be anti fur and argue from the animals perspective. This was the case a few years back when a royal tailor in the UK created uproar when they made a coat from over 100 hamster skins. People are quick to react and say awww, all those 100's of animals.

 

The reality is that all our clothing has to come from somewhere and in the process obtaining it, some resources of some sort are used. In the case of most clothes it means using a blend of nasty oil based synthetics and cotton. However people aren't as clever to make the association that oil is not renewable, pollutes and is hard to recycle in synthetic clothing. Likewise, cotton uses loads of pesticides which do huge damage and is estimated to kill 20000+ humans alone (so the impact on the environment / animals is a lot bigger and more long term in terms of damage). Unless you are only going to wear hemp or stick a big leaf over your privates, you/people need to understand that wherever you get your clothing, it will have an impact, and people need to rationalise the environmental cost of their choices.

 

What I never understand is that people never make a scene with say silk. That uses 1000's of silk worms. Generally speaking, the smaller the animal and lower it is in the food chain, the more primitive it is, and therefore it is less likely to have a such an evolved nervous system / brain that is able to interpret feelings from the environment as well, not to mention smaller animals can be killed more humanely say compared to a cow.

 

It's stupid really because science has proven that plants to some degree have feelings / awareness of the environment. Does this mean that in the future we are going to end up with vegetable rights groups?

 

I think many fur wearers have questioned the ethicalness of their choice, and most are rational enough to understand the bigger picture better the silly idiots who spend all their life worrying.

 

Just enjoy the furs for what they are, and wear them with pride. There are some really nice mens furs these days. I nearly always have a fur lined jacket on now when I need to wear a coat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

please don't think I feel so "sorry" for the animals that I think they should be deprived of making there "furry" donation. My protest on behalf of the foxes ended the moment I was swathed in there soft fur. I tried to resist ,but pleasure overcame guilt! The feeling was so sensual I crave it to this day! I love fur coats,but I go crazy when I see a woman wearing the whole animal! The more tails,paws and heads the better! I also like to see women on bearskin rugs. I like to think "we all want to be desired by the ladies,unless your a fur bearing animal and she desires fur!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

please don't think I feel so "sorry" for the animals that I think they should be deprived of making there "furry" donation. My protest on behalf of the foxes ended the moment I was swathed in there soft fur. I tried to resist ,but pleasure overcame guilt! The feeling was so sensual I crave it to this day! I love fur coats,but I go crazy when I see a woman wearing the whole animal! The more tails,paws and heads the better! I also like to see women on bearskin rugs. I like to think "we all want to be desired by the ladies,unless your a fur bearing animal and she desires fur!

 

I think you speak for the majority here! I have no problem wearing my fur lined jackets, or wearing my fox & leather trooper hats in winter (the hat of which is blindingly obvious it's real fur, it's got such thick lush long fur ), even in though UK is supposed to probably be the most fur-hostile place in the world. In fact it's great wearing my fur hat because people of all types turn their heads and stare. I'm sure one day I'm going to make someone have a car crash from it

 

I have to say it's pretty rare seeing fur sighting here in the UK, but I've seen some really great looking young professional women wearing full length rabbit coats where the leather side of the rabbit skin is worn out (and the fur worn in) last winter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The "Time" article is dated June 24, 2001; but, it is apparently from no later than early 1990!?! The Aspen vote on fur sales that it mentions (having then yet to take place) actually took place on Tuesday, February 13, 1990. The story also mentions Princess Diana's anti-fur sentiments-- without mentioning (as it presumably would have) that she was already dead for nearly four years by the start of the summer of 2001!

 

The early 1990s were really the zenith of the anti-fur movement-- which exploited both an economic downturn and a few consecutive overly warm winters, along with the usual resort to class warfare and base human envy. The movement might always be with us; but, it is unlikely that it will ever again seem on the ascendancy-- which is precisely how it attracted so many "I'd Rather Go Naked Than Wear Fur!" supermodels who now parade around in furs, professionally and personally, without so much as blushing at their being former signatories to PeTA's "Models of Compassion" pledge. Such are the whims and vagaries of the fashion industry and its devout fashionistas....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I apologize for any confusion. I simply thought some of the furs displayed on the youtube video were exquisite and I thought the gallery owner's assessment of the animal rights folks in the Time article was right on target. It appears the links in both posts were questionable choices, so I have deleted both posts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In no way was I suggesting that the article should not be linked to by you! I was merely trying to put it into its proper perspective by pointing out that it was quite evidently published (in print) in late 1989 or early 1990-- when the Bambifascia were feeling their oats, due to the coincidences that I mentioned in my previous post. I assume that the June 24, 2001 date listed was the date that it was placed on line by (the then) AOL-Time Warner. Whatever, their moment in the sun has passed; but, they will obviously keep preaching to the choir, while praying for Armageddon....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This issue of fur as a commonly used material for human use has been discussed from the inception of The Fur Den [back in Melody] and it has been generally agreed by all that it is not only appropriate but reasonable.

 

This is all quite aside from fur as an erotic or sexual material.

 

It's "Technology" is far in advance of anythng man has developed from sythetics such as oil which most clothes and household materials are derived from. This alone puts a crimp in the Anti-fur argument. In that alone it is far more "Ecological".

 

This "Life Force" issue was discused adnausia in another thread recently and the one aspect that came from that making real sense was the link with Budism as a "Life Force" argument. Actually a very narrow perspective on the world.

 

It's kissing cousin Hinduism has no such scruples. Indeed it has certainly the most proactive erotic position of any perspective on life.

 

My point is that all these philosophies and perspective on life and the world around us colors our views emotionally and "factually".

 

When looked at from the perspective where most folks live their lives the anti's don't really hold solid ground. It's purely an emotional response to some prior contitioning, not reality.

 

One's emotional respose to the tactile feelings of fur itself is quite real and "ancient" in our social, subconscious and genetic beings.

 

Though we may vary as to our individual extent of sensual, sexual and personal enjoyment of furs, to whatever extent, it's all quite normal.

 

I don't think I could trust an Anti-Fur person to ever be truthful and honest with me about anything of substance or consequece. If they can't be truthful with themselves who would they ever be truthful with me?

 

OFF

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The "Time" article is dated June 24, 2001; but, it is apparently from no later than early 1990!?! The Aspen vote on fur sales that it mentions (having then yet to take place) actually took place on Tuesday, February 13, 1990. The story also mentions Princess Diana's anti-fur sentiments-- without mentioning (as it presumably would have) that she was already dead for nearly four years by the start of the summer of 2001!

 

Trying to avoid a national tragedy -- An entire day passing without someone posting a comment on the Fur Den forum.

 

DKMain, I noticed a date discrepancy on the Time article (the 33 year old lady would have been about 16 in 1984 (the year she acquired her silver fox coat)), but I forgot about the discrepancy by the time I got to the end of the article and ran across the gallery owner's comments about the animal rights activists. I thought her sentiments were on the money so I pulled her quote from the article and posted the link. I watched the youtube video with the volume down, my focus being on the fur parade. When I read your comments I started researching a response (FYI - the date of the article was 12/18/89), but about a third of the way through the research/writing it just started feeling like a homework assignment so I said "Eh - Screw it" and just deleted them. 8)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The 12/18/89 date means that it actually hit the newsstands on 12/11/89 (as that is how the news weeklies date their issues)-- which was a Monday that I happen to recall well (albeit for reasons other than that issue of "Time"). I also well recall the big election in Aspen on Valentine's Day Eve 1990. I used to have a video that I recorded off of the news that used some of the same footage (from KUSA) as that now posted on YouTube-- e.g., the beautiful, petite blonde, in the orange sweater and white pants, trying on several luxurious furs in the Revillon Furs salon in Aspen.

 

The Fur Information Council of America was so impressed with the pro-fur performance of the Revillon store manager, Mark Kirkland, shown in that clip, that it hired him soon after the election. The mayor behind the Aspen fur-ban vote, Bill Stirling, barely survived a recall election after his anti-fur imbroglio. His wife, Katherine Thalberg, who died last year, was a noted animal-rights activist-- and the daughter of MGM's one-time boy wonder Irving Thalberg and his celebrated actress-wife Norma Shearer. As far as I know, the latter, who died in 1983, never forswore her own love of furs....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey tom4fur, looks like we got distracted by another post that got removed, so back to what you posted. You stirred some things I've been knocking around in my mind a while. It could be that part of the sway fur has in my erotic imagination goes beyond its texture which is rich in its own right. One metaphor for sexual expression is death. Look at all the works of literature and drama where lovers die. It's a figure of twisting together fates and life purposes.

 

So we might in a way envy the hapless foxes: how to give so much so totally? How to furnish such pleasure so constantly?

 

I remember a quote from an actress of the middle of the last centry--though unfortunately not its exact words or the acress' name: men come and go, but a fur coat's yours for good.

 

We might want to identify with the foxes, but at the same time shrink back from paying with our lives.

 

I don't see the end of that yet, so I'll leave it admittedly half-baked.

 

frugalfurguy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...