Fur Commission USA commentary, June 4, 2010

http://www.furcommission.com/news/newsF12a.htm

Moral Acceptability of Fur Stabilizes; Animal Testing Draws Nearer : Gallup
Men and women divided on animal issues

By FCUSA Communications Director Simon Ward

According to Gallup's latest "moral acceptability" poll, published May 26, the proportion of Americans who find "Buying and wearing clothing made of animal fur" to be morally acceptable has remained stable for the last two years, consolidating its recovery after three years of decline.

Since the poll began in 2001, the majority of respondents have always expressed acceptance of fur. This is unremarkable since almost all Americans eat meat and wear leather (fur with the hair removed). Sheepskin boots (sheep fur) are big sellers, while the finest examples of our iconic cowboy hat are beaver felt.

But this acceptance is not overwhelming, and it also fluctuates over time. From a high of 64% in 2005, fur's positive rating began falling, to just 54% in 2008. It then recovered sharply in 2009 to 61%, and settled back to 60% this year.

Of the 16 issues polled, the most comparable with fur is the acceptability of "Medical testing on animals". Since both issues concern the use of animals, trends in the two sets of results show expected similarities (see chart). Indeed, as with fur, 2008 marked the low point of support for animal testing also.

A small disparity between the results still merits special consideration, however.

Prior to last year's survey, fur had been less acceptable than animal testing every year except for two, in which it was ahead by just one percentage point. In 2004, when fur inched ahead for the first time, FCUSA called it "mildly surprising".

"Society deems an activity 'moral' or 'immoral' based largely on the perception of need - of the end justifying the means," we wrote. While warm clothing is easy to justify, and can even be a life-or-death choice, steadily falling costs (to the consumer, not the environment) of petrochemical synthetic clothing have reduced society's sense of absolute "need" for natural fibers like fur.

Animal testing, in contrast, has led to treatments that have saved millions of human lives, and new treatments emerge each year. While some people are convinced all animal models can be simulated on a computer, for the rest of us - including almost all medical researchers - animal testing is as "necessary" as it gets.

So in 2009, we were even more perplexed at Gallup's findings, as a 4-point gap opened up between fur (61%) and animal testing (57%).

But in 2010, balance has been restored, with 59% finding animal testing acceptable, just 1% fewer than approve of fur.

If this is the result of a far more proactive approach to public relations by the medical research community in the last couple of years, then kudos to them. But at the end of the day, we are still nonplussed how anyone can approve of fur but not of animal testing.
Gender and Animal Issues

This year, Gallup's report highlighted those issues which most sharply divide the sexes. If its findings are truly representative, they are surprising to us, and apparently to Gallup also, and warrant the attention of everyone involved in communications and education for the fur clothing business.

"The sharpest differences between men and women on these issues are not found on abortion or other reproductive matters, but on three issues that involve the ethical treatment of animals," it reported.

Along with fur and animal testing, the third animal issue polled was "Cloning animals".

The greatest disagreement, by far, was over fur, with 73% of men finding it morally acceptable versus 48% of women. That's a staggering difference of 25%.

The second greatest difference of opinion was over cloning animals, with 43% of men approving, versus 19% of women - a gap of 24%.

And in third place came animal testing. Sixty-nine percent of men approve, versus 49% of women, a difference of 20%.

In contrast, the gap between men and women on abortion was just 5%, with 41% of men approving and 36% of women.

Gallup makes no attempt to explain these yawning chasms in opinion, inviting the clichéd and glib conclusion that women really are the more caring and compassionate sex.

Another glib explanation might be that males in today's society remain more in touch with nature, and its cycle of life and death, than females. Many more men than women are involved hands-on in commercial or recreational hunting, fishing and animal agriculture. Through these activities, they achieve a greater comfort level with benefitting from animals, including from their deaths. Maybe.

Whatever the reason, we should all strive to be sensitive and smart when it comes to our complex relationship with animals. Less than 3% of the our planet can support crops, while petrochemical synthetics are unsustainable and polluting. Humans will always depend on animals for food and fiber. The balancing act we must achieve is between compassion for individual animals and compassion for the environment as a whole.
Moving Forward

The fact that natural-fiber fur clothing for cold weather is even included in a poll on morality is regrettable, since it ingrains in the public perception the idea that fur should be a moral issue. (We urged Gallup years ago to reconsider its inclusion, but were ignored.)

We work with what we're given, however, and at the end of the day, a positive response of 60% is respectable, especially given the advent of such confusing petrochemical products as "eco fleece" and "syn-chilla"!

But it could be much better overall, and should be much better among women.

Looking to the future, we need to capitalize on society's growing understanding and acceptance of sustainable use and the need to care for the environment.

Imagine if Gallup rephrased its question as follows: "Which is more morally acceptable: clothing made from petrochemicals; or clothing made from natural, renewable, biodegradable fibers produced by recycling food production waste, or maintaining healthy stocks of wildlife in balance with habitat?"

Even without flashing photos of the Gulf of Mexico oil spill, the positive response for fur, a natural fiber, should be overwhelming.