Fur Hypocrite: Alexandra Shulman and British Vogue

The first in our “Fur Hypocrite” series, this post features British Vogue and its editor in chief, Alexandra Shulman. I took a look at their “no fur” policy, and found some very interesting…hypocrisies.

Kate Moss, British Vogue's most used cover star, wearing fur.

I was quite surprised to hear that British Vogue had a “no fur” policy for their magazine, considering fur plays a huge role in the luxury fashion world. Alexandra Shulman, editor of British Vogue, claimed in a Telegraph interview earlier this year “We have a no-fur policy, but the odd cuff and collar creep in.” Creep in? Either you have an anti-fur policy, or you don’t.

However, in an interview for the Guardian, Shulman claims “I wear the odd piece of fur; I don’t have strong personal feelings against it, but I would feel uncomfortable swathed in a mink coat. It would seem unnecessary, ostentatious and somewhat unfeeling, though I can’t explain it more than that.” Can’t explain it? Wow, that’s pretty articulate for a Vogue editor.

Prada, fox fur, fashion advertising

Prada's spring summer 2011 campaign, featuring fur. British Vogue are happy to take their advertising dollars, isn't that a bit hypocritical?

The article continues to explain “Shulman says that, ‘broadly speaking’, British Vogue does not feature fur, other than fur advertising, which is not in her remit. ‘However, there is an element of common sense to my policy on this which dictates that since we are there to report on fashion trends, if those trends include fur we will, for instance, show catwalk images that include fur. We do carry some skins like sheepskin, and occasionally a fur trim creeps in.'”

I find it incredibly hypocritical that British Vogue would have a so-called “no fur” policy in order to satisfy their animal activist readers, while still including catwalk images that feature fur, to satisfy their advertisers.  Shulman should really do some research into the fur industry, and make an educated statement, rather than “not being able to explain it.” On top of that, she admits she wear fur herself, but it isn’t good enough for her magazine? You can’t have you cake and eat it, Alexandra. Either take a stance against or for fur, by learning some facts. But don’t sit on the fence with a hypocritical policy like this.

Kate Moss image source.

6 thoughts on “Fur Hypocrite: Alexandra Shulman and British Vogue

  1. Pingback: Related Features | free doll games

  2. Pingback: Related Features | free clothes

    • LOL–too cute–but not true–we are NEVER an animal when we put on the fur–but we are the ultimate consumer–having found a use for even the coating, while the meat can be used or eaten by other carnivores.  We could no more BE an animal when we wear its fur than we could be a person if we paraded around in their skin.  Nothing wrong with fur–but even Kate Moss should work at keeping it real and not diverging into romantic or superfluous metaphors.

  3. “Occasional trim sneaks in…”   Can you actually get enough fur from an animal to make  cuffs or collar or trim a belt or hemline without actually KILLING it?  the problem with fur hypocrites is that they want the best of both spheres–to appear to be empathetic to animals and yet be fashion gurus whose image often includes the use of leathers, skins and furs.    I don’t include wool in this or cashmere, because they are items that  can be harvested while still keeping the actual animal alive–in fact many do not know this but sheep MUST be sheared.  An unshorn sheep is one that may be doomed to die.  HOW?  They …tip over–and the weight of their wool do not allow them to get up–they become sitting “sheep” prone to predators but mostly, they die from suffocation as the weight of their own bodies slowly asphyxiate them in the sideways  prone position.


    ..and now, my own disclosure–I own a closet full of vintage furs, exotic skins and cashmere–and I LOVE them all–and I do mean exotic and often illegal (but they were not when the furs were made) including baby seal, jaguar, cheetah, monkey fur, then the still legal geoffrey cat and broadtail lamb, curly lamb, muskrat and fox

    and HOW do I feel about the ethics of wearing fur?  ETHICS are actually the stds professionals apply to police their own industry–I’m not a furrier–I am a wearer and collector of vintage fur.  So How do I feel about wearing my vintage furs?  Just fine.

    And when I pair such fur with ostrich, alligator, croc or stingray,  or shagreen, bags and shoes?  SUBLIME.

    I eat meat also.  Does that make me a killer? Yes? Okay–I’ll take that as well as a predator.  this is the order of things and while I may one day change my mind on eating so much meat (already have cut waaaay back on red meat) as long as  it is available–what I do will NEVER be governed by popular opinion but about me navigating my own life.

    I LOVE vintage furs–if you have some and no longer want them and they are of an exotic nature–feel free to offer them up–but I have no need for fox or beaver or raccoon or mink (unless it is a jacket with HUGE bell sleeves)  I would like a lynx coat –also not interested in wolf–too coarse in texture for me.  🙂

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s