We want to hear your opinion: Join the debate below! ? Erlend Elias Skoglund Bragstad uses furs he has either inherited or bought second-hand, for example from Kirkens Bymisjon, and he does it with a clear conscience. – Then you do not contribute to production and you are also not to blame for the fact that animals have been exposed to suffering. Siri Martinsen, head of the animal welfare organization NOAH, strongly disagrees with this statement. – If you dress in fur, it is a signal to the world that animal cruelty is okay, she believes. In 2019, it was decided that all forms of fur farming should cease in Norway. The reason is that animals should not suffer because of humans. This is what the law says: On 21 June 2019, the Storting passed by 101 votes to 68 a new law banning the keeping of fur animals. It is not allowed to keep animals such as mink, silver fox, blue fox, ferret, raccoon and chincilla. The reason is that the animals or their offspring should not suffer or die with a view to saddle or other exploitation of the fur. Producers who kept fur as of 15 January 2018 have until 1 February 2025 to wind down production. There is no prohibition against wearing fur, but there is a general opinion that we should leave it alone. Do you think it’s okay to wear fur? Yes. It is tradition and culture. It is a warm garment. No. It is supporting animal cruelty and is not relevant. A coat that has been bought second-hand or inherited is perfectly fine. Only if the fur comes from a wild animal. Show result Afraid of trend-setting fashion Live Kleveland is head of communications in the Animal Welfare Alliance. She quickly states that reuse in itself is very positive, but she rejects all use of fur as clothing, even if it is inherited or recycled. The reason is that it creates fashion. A mink kept in a cage, while he waits to become part of a coat. Photo: Lars Erik Skrefsrud / news – If you have a cool style with used fur, you can be an inspiration to others. People can choose to buy themselves a new coat, to imitate you, explains the communications manager. At the same time, she says that if an older lady uses an old coat she has had for many years, then it is different. It is not trendsetting in the same way as when a young person wears fur. – Shoemaker Wenche Foss, for example, used fur, but when she found out how the animals were mistreated, she changed her attitude, says Kleveland. What do you mean? Is it possible to defend the use of fur, or not at all? Hi! Welcome to dialogue at news. Since you are logged in to other news services, you don’t have to log in again here, but we need your consent to our terms of use for online dialogue Foss had a cupboard full of old furs. She chose to use them until she died, but in the media it was clear that she strongly distanced herself from fur farming. Photo: Cornelius Poppe / SCANPIX Reuse or just to remove? Erlend Elias Skoglund Bragstad is, among other things, known from the TV program “Skal vi danse” and “Famen Kjendis”. He is well aware that, by virtue of his position, he can be seen as a role model. – I think it’s cool to buy all kinds of used clothes rather than new. If people were inspired by me, it is something that the environment and the world will benefit from in the long run. Siri Martinsen in NOAH was not impressed. She believes that there is no sense in using up that fur in any sense. – Recycling fur into the fashion image is not important and it is not right, when the consequence can make the situation for animal welfare worse, says Martinsen. She also adds: – If you are absolutely going to use him up again, you can stuff him into the wall, so that the mouse can use him for his mouse balls. A question about values Stylist Erlend Elias Skoglund Bragstad, for his part, saw a big question mark about another thing: – That someone comes to me with criticism for wearing fur, while a belt and shoes made of animal skin are completely inside, I call that double standards. It is not Live Kleveland in the Animal Protection Alliance. – There is a big difference between animals that provide fur and animals that provide leather. Animals that have fur are wild animals, while animals that produce skin are mainly domesticated. Live tells further that wild animals with fur nourish a natural moisture for humans. They have to live in captivity so that we can use their fur. She believes that it cannot be compared to domesticated domestic animals, which are humans’ main source of leather for belts and shoes. – If someone is going to criticize me, they should have a completely clean path themselves, says Erlend Elias. He did not allow himself to be persuaded that all tame animals are fine, and continued: – If you don’t wear a leather belt, leather shoes or clothes made of plastic or small children’s hands – yes, then we can have a discussion! Erlend Elias in an inherited mink coat. Photo: Hanna Johre / Hanna Johre
ttn-69
Erlend Elias does not hesitate to dress in inherited fur – is it inside? – news Trøndelag
