In another example of what happens when people drop their logic subscription, West Hollywood California has outlawed the sale of fur:
Putting animal rights over fashion and its own vibrant shopping scene, West Hollywood’s leaders gave final approval on Tuesday to a first-in-the-nation ban on the sale of fur clothing within city limits.
The five-member City Council of the tiny, tony municipality wedged between Beverly Hills and Hollywood voted 3-to-1 with one abstention to approve the ordinance, which takes effect in 2013, said City Councilman John Heilman, who voted “no.”
May I say that not one less animal will be killed for its fur as a result of this? Thank you.
Some call this next bit irony. I call it biting the hand the feeds you:
The ban was tentatively adopted by the council on September 20 and had been expected to win easy enactment two weeks later. But it ran into stiff opposition from the local Chamber of Commerce and the fur industry, whose main trade group, the Fur Information Council of America, is based in West Hollywood.
Of course, there are some exceptions. Lots of them, as it turns out:
As passed by the council the measure will outlaw the sale of any garment made “in whole or part from the pelt or skin of an animal with its hair, wool or fur.”
The ordinance cites as explicit examples furs made from a fox, mink, rabbit, bear, seal or chinchilla. Clothing made from wool sheared from sheep is not affected by the ban, nor is furniture or leather goods.
The council also adopted an exemption for “vintage” garments containing fur.
So. Fur is bad. Skin is good (if it is handbags, shoes, and seats).
I see a coming run on “vintage” garments which can be accessorized with fur.
The silver lining to this whole deal? Would it be terrible to say that they’ve foxed themselves out of one? I thought so.