It must have been a very slow News Day
Editorial by Eugene Lapointe
IWMC President

On August 11 the New York Times (p. G1 cover of the Thursday STYLE section) ran what appears to be a deliberately inflammatory and unnecessarily provocative piece about the fashion industry's renewed use of karakul or Persian lamb skins in the new fall clothing lines.

Highpoints of the piece include the extremely high prices for items made of this material, which range from designer handbags around $1200, to high end dresses and outer wear that range from $7,000 and up through $25,000+. These are hand made, new fashions that include beads, special dyes and quilted effects which are said to be very popular among those women who can afford them or who perhaps feel that they must be adorned in the latest and most exotic that the fashion world has to offer. And we applaud those ladies who can choose to acquire these items, because they will be noticed and admired for their taste and their obvious ability to buy the best. Such ladies plan to be "on stage" in society when they dress in these beautiful products.

The New York Times writer, however, was obviously trying to put a damper on the fashion industry's latest creative efforts and on their bottom line by noting that the origin of these items may often be days-old or even fetal lambs, as if this should be a factor to consider when purchasing and wearing a fashion item. This is a very big "so what" to those who know and appreciate fine furs and high quality skin items for their clothing and accessories. All domestic sheep are bred and raised for one purpose; they are destined to become food and clothing items. Why should any rational person care how many days old these creatures are when their owners slaughter them for use?

The writer (Eric Wilson) shamelessly attempts to stir up a controversy with his claims that while many of the new fashion items are actually lambskin, perhaps (gasp) even from unborn lambs, many ladies who shop at high end retail outlets may be unaware of the origin of the items they are considering, and perhaps they would reconsider and not buy them if they only knew what they really are. It appears that Wilson is attempting to call in the PETAs for a Fall Fashion Bashfest.

We realize that the New York Times staff is itching for controversy, and if it does not occur without their help, they are not adverse to stirring up the pot so that they will have something to photograph and write about later on, when autumn buying and winter wearing is getting a good pre-Christmas start. Given that PETA has taken a severe blow to their credibility lately due to the kitty and puppy killing scandal, perhaps Wilson and his editors felt that this Lamb on the Runway piece would get some action going again, and give the Times some sensational material down the road.

On a similar note, perhaps it also time for New York fur industry spokespersons to wise up and quit talking about using materials because they "more closely resemble fabric than natural skins. Get with it...the anti-fur craze days are running behind and are perceived as pretty lame anymore. Both wild furs and farmed furs are wonderful products, and both categories are produced in ways that can be defended on humane, environmentally friendly and conservation-supporting grounds. Both are stable parts of the fashion industry and both contribute to the culture and the economy of producers and consumers alike. All furs and skins are better products from an environmental perspective than are plastics and other synthetics, as the manufacture of the latter produce toxins that never go away. Fur is an earth-friendly product, and synthetics will always be perceived as cheap imitations.

The New York Times needs more to do than to start another lame attack on the use of natural products as women's retail purchases. IWMC challenges its editors to encourage their people to write about the real world of fashion and with a serious concern for truth and respect for diversity of choices in clothing, food, and other consumer goods. Why should women of any age in today's world be held in low regard in the manner advocated by Edward Wilson, who seems to propose that many are not knowledgeable and need him to educate them on choosing moral choices off the rack? This tradition of false, misleading and inflammatory "expose`" needs to be replaced with some common sense reporting on consumer trends and perspectives about using clean natural products.