Head of fur industry group: J Crew "didn't want headache"
In another moronic pro-fur article in the "newspaper" Washington Times, the fur industry and its shills are trying desperately to spin the J.Crew suspension of fur sales as having nothing to do with the PETA boycott while at the same time saying that fur is "flying off the shelves."
I thought J Crew was in the business of selling clothing products for a profit but I guess not.
So if J. Crew took fur off of its shelves in the first days of the holiday shopping season when fur products are "flying off the shelves", then what could their reason be?
Keith Kaplan, Executive Director of the Fur Information Council of America says that J. Crew stopped selling fur because they "didn't want the headache."
Wow. I didn't know corporations put the prevention of headaches in front of profit. . Imagine the CEO of J Crew going in front of the Board and explaing, "we could have made money selling fur but we suspended fur sales because we didn't want the headache."
I wish more corporations suffered from headaches. And if corporations are such averse to experiencing these headaches, I hope PETA starts giving out more of them and with the head of the Fur Infomation Council of America confirming that it was this headache that stopped fur sales at J Crew, I am sure more are to come.
At the beginning of the article, they have some alleged fur-consumer commenting on why she loves fur. "The minks are raised on a farm. That's what they're for." I don't know whether to cry or laugh. How do you respond to that? Yes, Ms. Kelly, fur farms are there because of the fur trade. It is like justifying slavery by pointing to the existence of slaves' quarters. "The slaves live on the plantation. That's what they're for." Or if one justified abortion by merely pointing to the existence of abortion clinics or prostitution by pointing to the existence of brothels, the examples go on and on.
"That's not the business J.Crew is in," Owen Blicksilver, a spokesman for the retailer says. "It's less than 1 percent of the product line. The decision was made a month ago."
I thought J Crew was in the business of selling clothing products for a profit but I guess not.
So if J. Crew took fur off of its shelves in the first days of the holiday shopping season when fur products are "flying off the shelves", then what could their reason be?
Keith Kaplan, Executive Director of the Fur Information Council of America says that J. Crew stopped selling fur because they "didn't want the headache."
Wow. I didn't know corporations put the prevention of headaches in front of profit. . Imagine the CEO of J Crew going in front of the Board and explaing, "we could have made money selling fur but we suspended fur sales because we didn't want the headache."
I wish more corporations suffered from headaches. And if corporations are such averse to experiencing these headaches, I hope PETA starts giving out more of them and with the head of the Fur Infomation Council of America confirming that it was this headache that stopped fur sales at J Crew, I am sure more are to come.
At the beginning of the article, they have some alleged fur-consumer commenting on why she loves fur. "The minks are raised on a farm. That's what they're for." I don't know whether to cry or laugh. How do you respond to that? Yes, Ms. Kelly, fur farms are there because of the fur trade. It is like justifying slavery by pointing to the existence of slaves' quarters. "The slaves live on the plantation. That's what they're for." Or if one justified abortion by merely pointing to the existence of abortion clinics or prostitution by pointing to the existence of brothels, the examples go on and on.
posted by Ed at 7:50 AM
0 Comments:
0 comments
<< Home