Activist interupt spring fashion week

We've been hearing that same thing for decades - 'one step at a time'. I'm still yet to hear any coherent argument as to how these single-issue campaigns move animals an inch closer to freedom. I'm still waiting. Anti-fur campaigns have been going decades, yet the fur trade is as strong as it ever was.

How can you ever expect a large portion of people to pay attention to 'Fur is Cruel!', when they are off to have a slaughtered chicken, cow, sheep or pig which they accept through their actions as morally acceptable?

If you've ever had discussions with meat-eating strangers on the street about veganism and ending the use of animals, you would know this is not correct. If you are open and honest from the beginning and listen to their point of view, they will be hear what you have to say and they will be open to it too. What have you got to lose anyway? There are going to be people who think not wearing leather is 'extreme', so if why would I waste my time with a single issue anyway? Most people on here would agree that veganism is the moral baseline of the animal rights movement, yet they spend their time advocating family farms/ethical meat/vegetarianism or protesting against circuses, fur, dolphin slaughter and circuses.

If you agree with the abolitionist position, why not advocate it?

There is no empirical evidence to even suggest this.

well if you believe this awesome BUT this was not what caused fur to be banned from melbourne fashion week A HUGE victory, you can go have your abolitionist protests somewhere but i guarantee they won't be as effective at this point in time.

and in regards to this, you have no clue, put nicely. The Fur trade was practically demolished in the 80's and early 90's and really only appeared again this past 2 winter seasons ( battle me if you wish, but I am studying fashion design so its one of the areas i have a clue about)

Shoving Go Vegan down peoples throat does alienate the image of veganism and puts many of the public off, as well as animal welfare campaigns DO cause people to go vegan, for example after the live export expose Animals Australia run it was shown many people stopped eating ALL meat.

If you don't agree with the campaign thats fine, but people put alot of work into them and this is a very large victory , which if you had your way never would have happened.

Whats down?

Down = feathers.

oh ok , thanks for answering

Please, tell me what you think this has accomplished. Similar campaigns have been held for decades and most people think they are a joke. I've yet to meet a single vegan or even vegetarian who said they changed their lifestyle due to a fur/zoo/circus campaign.

See, your mentioning of 'abolitionist protests' in such a way suggests you are thinking only like a salesperson - ie. you'll only protest to the public a message which you think is easily digestible and not 'confronting'. Could that be any more elitist? People are not stupid and if you can have a good conversation with them, the vast majority will never walk away thinking veganism is 'extreme'.

Waving placards and screaming 'Fur is cruel. Go Vegan!', however, will no doubt leave people in a state of confusion.

Follz- you seem to be extremely negative in everything you say, in all posts.
When people congratulate people for being vegetarian, you say "you should be vegan"
When people celebrate fur not being warn at a show, you say thats not good enough.
When people celebrate- what seems like a small victory, it is still a victory. So smile, and just take it as a good thing- being negative doesn't help the animals either, heyyy

I could care less what is in vogue as either a general trend or at a fashion house. The fact of the matter is the fur trade is stronger than it ever has been and the anti-fur campaigns which have been raging for decades are clearly either ignored or thought of as a joke by the public.

Who is shoving what down who's throat? Please, I encourage you join my friends and myself when we do some more vegan education activism and you'll see the overwhelming positive responses and conversations we have with people. We focus on philosophical, moralistic and ethical arguments to move the conversation forward and I've yet to have one person disagree with the argument that it is wrong to use animals for purposes of pleasure, convenience, entertainment or for taste. From there, we get them to realise that, if they agree with the premise, veganism is their only realistic next step.

The live export meat sales drop was a flash-in-the-pan reaction from the public, and I'd be hugely surprised if it made even a single person go vegan.

This is where people get confused - they think advocating abolition means doing nothing. Absolutely not true. Focusing on educating people about animal rights/liberation yields far more results than waving placards and shouting 'Ban Fur!', I've seen it first hand. Whilst you may have got a single fashion show in one state in one country to ban fur, I'd prefer spending my time getting one single person to go vegan which would make a bigger difference in the long run.

Being a vegetarian automatically means people differentiate between flesh and derivatives- where there is no difference. Statistics show, too, that 3 out of 4 people who go veg revert back to their former lifestyle. So, in reality, it means people still don't get it.

Secondly, voicing my opinion about this 'victory' is not negative - it's realistic. This is purely about peoples ego. I'm still waiting to hear why this is a victory and how even just one animal on a fur farm was helped.

You are entitled to call my opinion negative, but I'm a little too street wise to count these things as victories. I consider a victory someone going vegan, or even just having a great conversation with a carnist. There is no crime in that. Once you spend some more time around these single issue campaigns, you'll probably then understand my point of view.