Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Vegan Suits- help!

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #31
    Originally posted by P J View Post
    Abuse and forced labor are pretty much the norm in most industries that have been exported to the third world, the garment industry in particular
    At no point did I argue against that claim. I said that sheep are not treated better than garment workers.

    Comment


      #32
      Originally posted by Matchbook View Post
      This. It's his wedding, not yours. But, hey, if he's alright with it, good for you.

      In either case, I would also vote for an unstructured cotton/chino option, since he's willing to accommodate your individual ethics to include you.
      I think we're neglecting the biggest part of this, the bride. If it was me, and hypothetically they decide to do a Christmas themed wedding, I'd respectfully decline being a groomsmen because I wouldn't want to be an added burden to the wedding, especially to the bride. It's her big event, not OP's. You're an accessory, and replaceable, so don't make them have to jump through hoops so that it works for you. Sounds more harsh than I intend, but, if it's a problem to wear wool and they've already planned all the suits to be wool, then respectfully decline. It's kind of them to want you to be a part of their big day, and you still can be, but from the sideline. The wedding is already stressful enough for the soon to be married, don't need to add to it.

      Comment


        #33
        I don't see why it's okay for OP to consider dropping out. If the OP was too short to fit the chosen suit, would they need to drop out then? Too heavy?

        Groomsmen are not typically just some random people the groom happens to know, or at least shouldn't be. It is possible the groom doesn't realize that by asking everyone to not just wear the same color and cut but the exact same clothes, he is dressing them like children. If I was doing that to my closest friends, I'd appreciate if someone told me.

        Edit: and I realize I'm playing devil's advocate for both sides of this...

        Comment


          #34
          [MENTION=14764]dpark[/MENTION] and [MENTION=2424]Ian[/MENTION]michelray are right. The groom is a good friend and was glad that I reached out to him about this issue, and so far has been willing to explore options with me. Dropping out would be perceived as even more intolerant and disrespectful here. I can't imagine a scenario where I was forced to drop out, but if it came to that and that's what they thought was best, then I would happily do so. Of course, I want to stay in the wedding party, and could possibly be persuaded to rent if it came down to it.

          I'm not sure about how the bride feels, but I think she has given this responsibility mostly to the groom to handle. She is pretty easy going, though I'm sure she wants the wedding to look a certain way. If it were my wedding, I would like to think I would be open to someone with an ethical objection to one of my choices. especially a friend who I respect and would be willing to to adjust things for. I do feel bad for raising an objection, but I would feel worse if I let it slide. Plus, the groom asked us for opinions/suggestions on suits to begin with, but just showed us the one he was most partial too. The point is, it is very reasonable to have this discussion in this situation.

          Also, though I didn't intend for this to be an ethical discussion, many people have responded with some great information on the issue of wool production, and I invite anyone who's curious to check out some of the undercover investigations.

          Comment


            #35
            Originally posted by dpark View Post
            No. Even places with horrible working conditions are better than the conditions sheep endure. If you treated humans the way sheep are treated, you'd be guilty of slavery and torture (psychological if not physical).
            Source?
            Don’t call what your wearing an outfit. Don’t ever say your car is broke.
            Don’t sing with a fake British accent. Don’t act like your family’s a joke.
            --Jason Isbell

            Comment


              #36
              Since you went ahead and brought it up...

              I don't have any problem with veganism. I have been there myself. I get it. But, the undercover videos strike me as cold-blooded fund raising activity.

              Here is how I see it: these organizations hear such-and-such might be engaging in abusive activity. The organization sends in an undercover to potentially discover the activity. If it is indeed discovered, the undercover shoots video of it for months, keeping it secret in order to grab enough video to make a promotional clip.

              My problem is a normal person would report abuse to the management and/or authorities the second they saw it go down. This would put the operation in hot water and likely end up in termination of the negligent employee(s) as well as new training initiatives, etc. But, if these undercovers reported what they saw, it would blow their chance to capture more video and thus mess up fund raising prospects.

              I suppose I should disclaim this opinion with the admission that I work in a business involved with raising animals, so I get to see the often boring, nonabusive side of this world regularly. And, I may be a bit used to good treatment as part of my job was to spec facilities that would pass third-party humane certification inspections.

              That all said, while I have no respect for someone that would abuse animals, I also don't have any respect for someone who would fail to report it in order to make a graphic video. It's like would it be okay if someone saw child abuse happening and recorded instead of reporting it to raise money for an anti-child abuse organization?

              Comment


                #37
                Indeed. And while this isn't really the place for this kind of debate, I also am skeptical of materials produced by any advocacy organization, of any stripe, when they are not actually backed up by verifiable, independent sources.

                Factory farming is, in my somewhat informed opinion, a great evil and I do my best not to support it. But factory farming is also rarely a factor in the production of wool because it doesn't work, and therefore makes little economic sense (raised in a farming community).

                There are also a number of clothing brands/mfrs who have committed to using ethically raised/"cruelty free" wool (somewhat surprisingly, H&M is one). We all pick our lines and make our choices, and I would strongly argue that a cruelty free wool is a better choice for the welfare of ALL the planet then a non-biodegradable, petroleum based synthetic.

                For me, it is akin to honey; my neighbor keeps bees and shares the honey. His bees pollenate our vegetable garden and fruit/citrus trees, and I can sweeten my tea with a product that doesn't require a refining process that has destroyed the Everglades.
                Don’t call what your wearing an outfit. Don’t ever say your car is broke.
                Don’t sing with a fake British accent. Don’t act like your family’s a joke.
                --Jason Isbell

                Comment


                  #38
                  Originally posted by BillN View Post
                  Source?
                  Source for what? Sheep are livestock. They are raised for wool and for slaughter. They are some of the luckier livestock in that they get to graze open fields. They still get funneled into cramped pens when it's time for shearing (or slaughter), at which point they are forcibly held and sheared against their wishes (sheep do not generally line up for shearing; it's kind of traumatic and best case they don't fight it). The males are castrated without anesthesia.

                  If you held a bunch of humans against their will, you'd be guilty of kidnapping. If you claimed and exerted ownership over a bunch of humans, you'd be guilty of slavery. If you forced hundreds of humans into cramped pens and then assaulted them with shears, you'd be guilty of psychological torture (and maybe physical due to the occasional injuries that arise from aggressive shearing). If you castrated humans you'd definitely be guilty of physical torture, to say nothing about the lack of anesthesia.

                  The places we talk about having horrible work conditions are generally not as bad as all this.

                  Comment


                    #39
                    Originally posted by dpark View Post
                    Source for what? Sheep are livestock. They are raised for wool and for slaughter. They are some of the luckier livestock in that they get to graze open fields. They still get funneled into cramped pens when it's time for shearing (or slaughter), at which point they are forcibly held and sheared against their wishes (sheep do not generally line up for shearing; it's kind of traumatic and best case they don't fight it). The males are castrated without anesthesia.

                    If you held a bunch of humans against their will, you'd be guilty of kidnapping. If you claimed and exerted ownership over a bunch of humans, you'd be guilty of slavery. If you forced hundreds of humans into cramped pens and then assaulted them with shears, you'd be guilty of psychological torture (and maybe physical due to the occasional injuries that arise from aggressive shearing). If you castrated humans you'd definitely be guilty of physical torture, to say nothing about the lack of anesthesia.

                    The places we talk about having horrible work conditions are generally not as bad as all this.
                    i don't know how you can possibly think you don't need a source for this. it's not even that i'm against you, i'm just genuinely curious....

                    Comment


                      #40
                      Originally posted by dpark View Post
                      They are some of the luckier livestock in that they get to graze open fields.
                      I understand this "open field" stuff appeals visually. The livestock shed seems like this cramped place in comparison. But, give a herd animal like a sheep the choice between being outside all the time and having a warm, dry place with food and they will take the latter. Imo, what really sucks is cheapo farmers who just leave their animals outdoors lacking adequate shelter to huddle shivering. I've heard of instances where people have left animals outside with frozen water... how are they supposed to drink?

                      Originally posted by dpark View Post
                      sheep do not generally line up for shearing
                      Are you serious? Sheep will line up for anything. Just lure some into a chute and others will follow to go line up for something, whatever it is. Vaccination, hoof trimming, shearing...


                      Originally posted by dpark View Post
                      The males are castrated without anesthesia.
                      Yes, when they are tiny, usually less than a week old. Older males require at least local anesthetic as it hurts too much for them. This is typically either done with banding (stops blood flow, falls off) or surgically (another one that city folk wince at... often done quickly with one's teeth).



                      Originally posted by dpark View Post
                      If you forced hundreds of humans into cramped pens and then assaulted them with shears, you'd be guilty of psychological torture (and maybe physical due to the occasional injuries that arise from aggressive shearing).
                      Is giving children haircuts psychological torture? The dentist?



                      Originally posted by dpark View Post
                      The places we talk about having horrible work conditions are generally not as bad as all this.
                      Mistreating workers is better than raising sheep? I really doubt that in terms of stress levels you would find the average sheep above the sweatshop laborer.

                      Comment


                        #41
                        [MENTION=10540]Scofield[/MENTION], exactly what do you doubt about what I said? I'm not going to try to cite every sentence I write. If there's something specific you question, we can talk about that. But a blanket "needs citation" is both pointless and untrue. There is no question that, e.g. sheep are livestock raised for wool and slaughter. I'm not going to find a citation for that. On the other hand, if you're talking about the castration without anesthesia, Mike Rowe has talked about this and I'm sure I could dig up a supporting article or video.

                        [MENTION=14805]ianmichaelray[/MENTION], I never said that mistreating workers is better than raising sheep. I said sheep are not treated better than garment industry workers. I stand by this statement. I would far rather be a garment worker than a human treated like livestock.

                        Comment


                          #42
                          Originally posted by dpark View Post
                          Source for what? Sheep are livestock. They are raised for wool and for slaughter. They are some of the luckier livestock in that they get to graze open fields. They still get funneled into cramped pens when it's time for shearing (or slaughter), at which point they are forcibly held and sheared against their wishes (sheep do not generally line up for shearing; it's kind of traumatic and best case they don't fight it). The males are castrated without anesthesia.

                          If you held a bunch of humans against their will, you'd be guilty of kidnapping. If you claimed and exerted ownership over a bunch of humans, you'd be guilty of slavery. If you forced hundreds of humans into cramped pens and then assaulted them with shears, you'd be guilty of psychological torture (and maybe physical due to the occasional injuries that arise from aggressive shearing). If you castrated humans you'd definitely be guilty of physical torture, to say nothing about the lack of anesthesia.

                          The places we talk about having horrible work conditions are generally not as bad as all this.
                          What about textile factories in Bangladesh collapsing on the workers, killing them? Or instances of humiliation and physical abuse at Nike factories where the supervisors forced their workers to run laps around the factories, etc. Those same factories being chained from the outside? The list of human rights abuses go on and on. I'm not excusing animal rights abuses in the clothing industry, but at the very least, sheep aren't aware that they're being humiliated or forced to work under duress in many instances.

                          Comment


                            #43
                            Also, PETA is notorious for fabricating and magnifying the scope of animal rights abuses. Does it happen? Yes. Does it happen in the scope that they claim? That's questionable.

                            Comment


                              #44
                              If it's unfair to assume that isolated incidents of animal cruelty are representative of the industry as a whole, it's equally unfair to assume that isolated incidents of garment worker abuses are representative of the whole industry.

                              I feel like this whole conversation is bizarre, though. It started because someone claimed that workers are treated worse than sheep as if this would alleviate a vegan's concerns about wool. It's possible if unlikely that the workers who make your suit are beaten severely and the sheep are given daily massages. But if you're opposed to wool because you believe it to be an immoral exploitation of sheep, then both the negative treatment of workers (which seems entirely unrelated to the particular textile they are sewing) and the relatively positive treatment of these particular sheep are irrelevant. If you believe it is immoral to own and exploit livestock, then whether the livestock are treated better or worse than garment workers doesn't really matter.

                              Comment


                                #45
                                [MENTION=14764]dpark[/MENTION]: just curious, you don't own any wool products?

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X