Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse

Film Glance Forum

  1. Home
  2. The IMDb Archives
  3. Fur-wearer? I'm so disappointed

Fur-wearer? I'm so disappointed

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved The IMDb Archives
10 Posts 1 Posters 0 Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • F Offline
    F Offline
    fgadmin
    wrote on last edited by
    #1

    Archived from the IMDb Discussion Forums — Brooke Shields


    blackie-5 — 15 years ago(October 28, 2010 01:11 PM)

    Here is an image of Brooke Shields that I'm very disappointed by. I have been such a fan of hers. Before you attach me for being a "Peta nut" (which I'm not), please read my reasoning for how I feel below
    http://iftfblog.com/?p=212
    One of the things that's too bad about our society is that if you stand up for something most people don't know a thing about, you are viewed as a "PETA fanatic".
    The problem with fur is the incredible, shocking cruelty with which the animals used in this industry are treated (animals used for fur are often skinned alive, or fatally electrocuted through the anus).
    It's not a matter of fanaticism. It is utter cruelty that no living thing should have to endure to feed someone else's greed or someone's idea of fashion.
    It's not fanaticism; it's simply a blend of knowledge, common sense, kindness, and compassion. Clearly Brooke Shields has none of these qualities.
    There is no reasonable person who would support wearing fur if they knew about the way animals bred for fur are often skinned alive or fatally electrocuted anally for their pelts.

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • F Offline
      F Offline
      fgadmin
      wrote on last edited by
      #2

      blackie-5 — 15 years ago(October 28, 2010 01:13 PM)

      To be clear, what I meant was - the link to photo of her picking out fur pelts (looking over a bunch of animals' dead bodies) is at the link below:
      http://iftfblog.com/?p=212

      1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • F Offline
        F Offline
        fgadmin
        wrote on last edited by
        #3

        GoTheDistance — 15 years ago(November 27, 2010 06:25 PM)

        People against animal rights people are just unethical 'jerks',ie Limbough types, often blinded by business. 90+% of people are against animal abuse..and don't need to be apologetic for being decent.
        Though it's likely that PETA has hurt the image of ethical people, and people who wish harm to Brooke are being hypocritical(as PETA is)

        1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • F Offline
          F Offline
          fgadmin
          wrote on last edited by
          #4

          melbalt22 — 14 years ago(June 16, 2011 08:35 AM)

          she's an awful fugly skank. And she's Republican. Makes sense that she wears fur. Republicans tend to be anti-animal-rights because they believe that God has created humans to be the chosen ones.
          She is such an awful bigotted human being. Kiddie porn in her youth, "devout Catholic", divorce, Republican. Plus can't act.

          1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • F Offline
            F Offline
            fgadmin
            wrote on last edited by
            #5

            cookiela2001 — 14 years ago(June 16, 2011 11:50 AM)

            << And she's Republican. Makes sense that she wears fur >>
            I'd be waaaaaaay more concerned by her being a Republican than by her wearing fur.
            What is the source for this? I believe her father was a Republican, but I never read that Shields herself was.

            1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • F Offline
              F Offline
              fgadmin
              wrote on last edited by
              #6

              IMDb User

              This message has been deleted.

              1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • F Offline
                F Offline
                fgadmin
                wrote on last edited by
                #7

                cookiela2001 — 14 years ago(June 30, 2011 10:44 AM)

                Or digesting a hamburger

                1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • F Offline
                  F Offline
                  fgadmin
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #8

                  krypton_son — 10 years ago(August 05, 2015 01:28 PM)

                  I'd be waaaaaaay more concerned by her being a Republican than by her wearing fur.
                  Really? Are you that much of a fragile PC libtard that someone having their own views offends you? It's your kind of scum that ruins it for everyone else.

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • F Offline
                    F Offline
                    fgadmin
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #9

                    SataiDelen — 11 years ago(August 28, 2014 04:09 AM)

                    Nice over-generalization there. Not all Republicans are against animal rights (or human rights). I'm a Republican, and proud of it. I do not wear fur, as I think it is unnecessary to kill an animal solely for their coat because I don't have one (fur/coat). There are other materials that I can use to stay warm, and I do (leather, wool, cotton, etc.) And before anyone jumps on me for wearing leather, think about it. Cows are used for meat AND leather, so not much is wasted product-wise.
                    Anyway, I am against animal testing for makeup, shampoo, etc.
                    I am pro-choice.
                    So, just so you're all aware, not all Republicans are old people opposed to common sense and human and animal welfare and rights.

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • F Offline
                      F Offline
                      fgadmin
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #10

                      krypton_son — 10 years ago(August 05, 2015 01:25 PM)

                      Wow melbalt22, idiot much? You sound like you must be an idiot libtard.

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      0

                      • Login

                      • Don't have an account? Register

                      Powered by NodeBB Contributors
                      • First post
                        Last post
                      0
                      • Categories
                      • Recent
                      • Tags
                      • Popular
                      • Users
                      • Groups