Nobody Likes Jennifer Lopez

‘But it is way different when you are talking about another born living being.’

Some people would say the same about abortion, and would take away the choice for that.
I don’t wear fur, personally, it’s expensive, I don’t want a nutcase to ruin it; and I’d probably feel a bit bad wearing it. (Although I do wear leather and eat meat.) But if someone else wants to, hey. The price of living in a free society.

For the record, this much in-fighting is ridiculous!

Katie and Kyros:
Both of you have valid points and idiotic points:
Katie:”Do not put insects in the same category as animals. If you do that you will brand yourself as totally insane and all your friends ( if you have any) will laugh at you.”
- How stupid do you want to look??? Instead of getting emotionally involved in this stupid aguement and making such irrational statements, stick to your “facts.” You sound like a crazy bitch who wants to force feed your own beliefs and ideologies to those who couldn’t care less. Back off.

Kyros:” State documents in Virginia showed that PETA euthanized about 6,100 domestic animals from 2001 to 2003, according to the AP.”
- Using those stats makes you look like an idiot. Clearly euthanizing animals is different to skinning them while alive, agreed? Perhaps a little less barbaric?

I am only using 1 example from each of you because if I picked through everything you’ve both said, this would turn into some kind of pointless essay (that I couldn’t be bothered writing tonight.)

My 2 cents: I think organisations like PETA are all bullshit profit obsessed companies who just want to make money, hiding behind their half assed campaigns against animal cruelty. I do not AT ALL condone animal cruelty – I am an animal lover and always have been.
Why more people can’t form their own opinions on what they will or will not accept as humane is beyond me – they always need to use whatever company/organisation SEEMS to take the strongest, most extreme stance against whatever was the problem in the first place. I can’t understand why so many people feel that they need to stick to an organisation that (lets face it) can’t be perfect just because using a name (for instance, PETA) makes their opinions seem more valid.

I don’t think that people should be labelled as idiots for eating meat and opposing animal cruelty – they are not the same thing.
You’ve got the issue of eating meat and how your meat comes to you (how the cows and pigs etc are killed, how it should be humane blah blah blah), and then you’ve got the issue of boiling kittens alive and throwing dogs out windows – not the same thing. Two seperate issues, people.
I also don’t think that animal rights activists should all be labelled as wackos because they choose a vegan lifestyle and do not support eating animal products, etc – it is a lifestyle choice – last time I checked, obesity doesn’t result in being called wacko, and yet it is a lifestyle choice. Don’t give me any bullshit about genetic issues and shit, that is extremely rare – most people are fat because they sit on their asses all day and eat shitty food – where’s the public outcry????

Having said ALL of that, in regard to Jennifer Lopez.

I think a large number of you have established that she’s talentless. I can’t recall a magazine article I’ve read where she was actually depicted as a nice person. She sounds like a bit of a dragon.
But, keeping all that in mind, I don’t think that it is fair that so many people are jumping on the “Jennifer Lopez supports animal cruelty because she wears and uses fur in her collections.”
Here’s a big hint for everyone out there who has something to say against the fur trade:
DON’T BUY INTO IT.

Everyone should stop forcing their opinions on others – Peta activists and critics alike.
Jennifer Lopez is a moron, but I don’t hear her running around demanding that everyone buy her freaking clothing, or her cds, or tickets to her movies.
If you have a personal problem with the fur trade and those who support it, DON’T BUY FUR.
If you have a problem with Jennifer Lopez – STOP BUYING INTO HER MERCHANDISE/CDS/MOVIES/CLOTHING LINE/PERFUME!

“Using those stats makes you look like an idiot. Clearly euthanizing animals is different to skinning them while alive, agreed? Perhaps a little less barbaric?”

Who cares, that was not the point. Skinning animals alive is disgusting and has to be stopped. But if animal rightist wouldn’t fight fur-farming in the US, we could control it better, agreed? This is the difference between fighting animal use (Peta, Kate ..) and fighting animal cruelty, which is important.

Peta killing animals was a completely different matter. We talk about an organisation who compares meat-eating with the Holocaust. And then they kill 80% of all animals they take care of? There was no comparism with fur-farming.

The old both sides are wrong approach. Let’s go to the middle is not applicable in this case. Because I’m already in the middle ground. And Kate & Co. are far out.:-)

Xiangzi,

It was a challenge getting through your post soon after you decided to call me a “bitch.”
For the future, if you want people to pay attention to you, you should start by not using deragoratory words against them.

Next, you go on to say that you couldn’t be bothered with writing an “essay,” yet your entry was literally the longest on this whole discussion. Belittling your own post like that makes you look insecure and makes people not take your opinion seriously.

But whatever. I do disagree with you on many points. At the same time, I will say that it’s great to hear you acknowledge that animal cruelty is wrong, which is at the heart of this discussion. Jennifer Lopez does indeed “enforce” her product on us- through incessant promotion and agressive marketing. (although recently less public) for many years she was in our faces CONSTANTLY- on our televisions, magazines, radio. She was a far more public image than PETA or any of its activists. And believe you me, she was selling something. She is her own product.

But why is she being singled out? Because her use of fur has been defiant, unapologetic and VERY PUBLIC. Every events she turned up at last fall and winter, she was rocking huge fur coats or fur trim. A celebrity like her- with a gazillion young fans- makes a strong impression on these little girls, who start thinking that “fur is cute; fur is hot; fur is pretty”, etc. It is a dangerous direction. That’s why she was singled out- she brought it on herself with her own irresponsibility. She became the most public and proud wearer of fur we had ever seen. To add fuel to the fire, she launched her fashion collection with damn near every piece having fur in it; and the grand finale featured an enormous wide-brimmed hat made entirely of fur. It feels to me that she played an instrumental role in bringing fur back in style.

So I hope that helps you understand why it’s Jennifer Lopez and not, say, Betsy Furlover from Staten Island. Other than that, I agree with you that we should absolutely NOT BUY FUR, or support Jennifer Lopez in any way.

Sigh.
Where to start? I’ll do one post for each of you.
Kyros: PETA killing 80% of the animals in their care. What do you expect them to do? These animals come to shelters because they are unwanted – people either bought them and then decided not to keep them/dump them, they were never anyone’s pet because of pet owners allowing their animals to reproduce freely even though they do not want the responsibility of looking after puppies/kittens, or the animals had to be removed or were found as victims of abuse and animal cruelty.
Instead of blaming PETA for putting down unwanted animals who will otherwise spend their miserable lives in an animal shelter (and lets face it, as they get older, their chances of being chosen for adoption grow slimmer), they put them down humanely. I really can’t find fault in that. If pet owners weren’t so stupid and irresponsible, there wouldn’t be such an overpopulation of dogs and cats in the first place.
It’s a nice fantasy – all the poor little dumped puppies and kittens get to go to loving homes.
It’s never going to happen, unless something is done to curb the excessive number of cats and dogs that are able to reproduce freely.
Why supply a demand that isn’t there.

Comparing eating meat to the holocaust – these people have no idea, do they?
On one hand you have them doing something that they HAVE to do (ie putting down animals), and on the other, they just keep talking crap.

And as for you being the middle ground, you can have one half and I’ll have the other:P
Pst, I think that you and I are already labelled as the crazies anyway – how can we not love PETA???!!!

Now for you, Katie.
I find your post interesting. No, really, I do. I love how you threaten that people won’t pay attention to my posts because I used derogatory language, and yet, you did.
You are so hypocritical. Here’s a selection of your posts in reply to Kyros: (in random order)
1.”Arguing with people/things like Kyros has proven useless, because he/she/it represent a segment of the population that is defined by stubbornness, lack of education and lack of compassion.”
- I love this because you’re so completely arrogant. Perhaps you’re confusing Kyros as stubborn, uneducated and not compassionate because his/her opinion doesn’t coincide with yours? You seem to think that because you couldn’t force feed Kyros your opinion/beliefs/ideologies, he/she is a lesser person because of it.
2.”In about T-minus 2 seconds everyone else will tune you out also.”
Again – says you? You seem to think that everyone is going to follow exactly what you say, and yet, I read so many comments directed towards Kyros later in the discussion, that, geee…no one must have paid much attention to your “recommendation.”
3.”It helps overshadow people like this Krynos, who generally have no rational thought process behind their empty argumen”
Overshadow? I didn’t know this was a popularity contest? Quick, I’d better go and congratulate someone else who shares my opinion in the hope that I can gain support.
4.”I’m starting to think you’re a little, how shall we say?..”the lights are on, but no one’s home” type of fella (or lady.)”
And you’re accusing me of talking in a derogatory way…
5.”Man, you are mental, there’s no doubt about it.”
So, as well as a self appointed academic, you’re a psychologist too??? What the hell relevance does that have, anyway??? Who are you to judge!
6.”Do not put insects in the same category as animals. If you do that you will brand yourself as totally insane and all your friends ( if you have any) will laugh at you.”
Not even going to comment on that one. Speaks for itself.
7.”Lastly, your argument against PETA- total BS.”
And you couldn’t even handle me calling you a female dog. Sounds like you have more of a mouth on you than I do.
8.”It’s typical of half-wits who generally hate themselves and have no causes they believe in. So, truthfully, I won’t waste my time addressing that, except to say that-by the way- I volunteer with…drumroll… people!! Now, what can you say for yourself, you sad self-hating sacks? Get a life…”
A life like yours? No thanks, I like my meat.
There you go again, Miss Psychology. Seeing as it’s coming from a self appointed academic, I’m surprised Kyros hasn’t

Hi XiangCi,

About killing care-animals you are of course right. It is a sensible option. As I have pointed out above. No questions there. Completely agreed. :-)

BUT not for an organisation like PeTA who compares meat eating to the Holocaust. They say animals have rights and apparently want to give them a right to live similar to humans. Then they go ahead and kill 80% of the animals they get? They always try to compare the treatment of animals with the treatment of humans and the next moment they euthanase animals because they would otherwise live in their care for too long? The ridiculous inconsistence should be apparent. :-)

And just to say that in Britain and Germany(know that) and Sweden(think so) animals in shelters ARE NOT killed if they are not kritically ill. So ordinary animal friends in these countries are less bloodthirsty than animal rightists like PeTA?

“how can we not love PETA???!!!”

I LOVE IT. I really love PeTA. They epitomise the Hypocrisy and contradiction of these animal rights people who want to tell others it is wrong to use animals.

“Because her use of fur has been defiant, unapologetic and VERY PUBLIC. ”

LOL she isn’t doing anything wrong and is doing it in public. How shocking. :-) It is great that we have PeTA who are giving our country new laws and enforce them for themselves. Lynch justice is great. What’s next? Fruitarier who throw paint at people who eat bread and therefore killed a plant? Tree-Lovers who free parquet flooring? Or religious people attacking atheists. Or the other way round?

**but exactly, xiang.**
you have a mouth full of truths. (and i’m not saying this in that.. mutually masturbatory way katie and her little buddy were talking to each other.)

oh kyros, i think he agreed with you in that peta talks crap. i agree with pretty much everything you’ve said.. but now you just want to keep on arguing, dont you? ;)

good day everyone.

Hi muriel,

I know I know, I realized that he was agreeing with me after I wrote the first posting.Then I didn’t want to toss the whole crap out. But you have to concede, that my second post is pretty witty. :-) (or not)

I am a she, darlings :p
I don’t know if I should take it as a compliment that you think I am a he, or as an insult.
Girls have brains too :P

That’s the problems with chinese names. We have no clue so we take the default value for internet discussions. :-)

Mmm, it’s an adopted name.
If I used my real name it would be too confusing, trust me.

ohh i’m sorry :) i’m a girl too, so really, the mistake was honest and i meant nothing by it. neither compliment nor insult, simply a mistake.

more confusing than xiangzi, though? :)

hi

:)

i wish Katie would post again. i want her to call me an idiot, too.

Me too :(

hi everyone,
guess a llittle quote bout Jlo wearing fur can stir up so much discussion. i have seen all the cruelty, and how racoons, dogs, cats, rabbits and similar animals’ fur have been ripped off while they’re still alive.pls put down ur all subjective points of view and see the videos first, (easily accessible at PeTA). To the fact that JLo is the discussion, i guess she has helped stir up by far, the biggest discussion of animal killing for fur among civilized places. i live in China (luckily in a civilized city), and it’s still in its developinig stages. the daily tortures and killings that happen within my country (as far as i know) happen purely cos we need to run our economies..and to feed the 13 billion mouths out there, it’s extremely sad. hey, ppl who come up to this site must have been brought up nice and civilized, so imagine, if we dont keep morality within our hearts, how can the community and the globe keep on running? as always, we hear the old generation saying that the next generation is always getting worse, so what will happen to the world in the future? can it still run? or will our next generation do anything just for money? i dont want to say this, but ppl in my nation is toooo poor they r just doing ALL sorts of things just to get a better living. bleaching rice, corns, wheat, flour; dying spices etc and some of you might truly understand it, some of you might not. because all of us here r extreemly lucky asses who can enjoy our lives. it’s just the fact to reallize our surroundings, to love and preserve the nature, and not kiling the animals for fur is one of them. if the a**holes out there who are usiing JLO to expand their fur business to roll for more riches, n JLO fans and lovers who admire her and also imitate what she wears, think of how many more animals will get suffered. u wont know what’s the ingredients of fur – it might be dogs or cats or rats fur. any fur that can undergo industrial processes, they will just make the hell out of it. i guess we, the civilized generation, should at least pass on good morales to the next generation.
yes, of course, we shouldnt limit or enforce others what to wear, what not to wear. but i agree that ppl shouldnt wear fur, it’s not doing good to the nature, aint doing good to any people, especially for the poor. they dont know a thing, ppl. poor ppl dont have morales cos they are uneducated, they r born to seeing animals’ fur ripped out alive. how do u think their lives will become when they grow up? think about it, do we really really need to wear fur?we’re living inside a greenhouse already.
so, with my most sincerity, do hope all of you can keep the good heart of ur side, and just, think before u buy or wear any fur. think further. thanks for ya’ll attention. :)

P.S. i have to claim that the videos shown on PeTA are not necessarily made-up shots. ok? those about foxes and racoons and dogs and cats being beaten up for furs happen in China, i dont know which part, defnitely not touring places. They are undercovered by animal-protection groups in Taiwan and Switzerland. So, i assure you, pls dont doubt that the videos are “so-called” torturing videos, as what REUTER reporters claimed it to be “so-called” ….

I mainly agree with Kyros; no one is arguing that it’s wrong to torture animals, but one has to come to terms that the fur trade is not going away. One can argue that the fur can be obtained in controlled environments where the animals are killed humanely, which Kyros DID in fact argue.

Katie: It’s true, if put to a choice to kill for food or vanity, one would have to choose food. But you are speaking Darwinistically, so for your argument to be balanced you would have to have a choice between killing for food or WARMTH. Both are a necessity. :/ But modern times, we really eat because we’re a bit hungry and it’s lunchtime, and we wear clothes because they look cute on us. What they actually WEAR is really no one’s business. They can wear their dead grandmother’s eyebrows for a fake mustache: who cares? They don’t care who they offend because it’s what they wanna do, and it’s LEGAL.

I think the reason why these arguments are so heated is because one bases its argument more on stats and logic while the other is heavily leaned on morale, guilt, and emotion. Both are cool; pogos/logos/ethos is always fun to watch in action, but you need to have a balance between all of them, and an understanding of the other person, to find real ground in the argument.

It also helps to not be a real asshole about everything.

JLO is a man who is trying to hide in fur thats why she married Marc Anthony!only a sissy like him would go for a man like JLo…and thats exactly why Ben said No to her cuz behind that huge butt hides a teeny weeny

There are myriad reasons to dislike JLo that have nothing to do with fur, and wouldn’t it be more fun to talk about those than to continue the fur debate that has raged for the last 100 postings? Maybe find some common ground? I am as certain as I have ever been about anything that no one involved in this debate is going to change anyone else’s opinion about fur. On to JLo:
1. Her hideous diction is like nails on a chalkboard;
2. Why she would choose Skeletor over any of her prior paramours is beyond me;
3. She’s just another asinine celeb who thinks marriage is just a lark.
On the other hand, the fat ass doesn’t bother me. In fact, I wish the fat ass would become as fashionable as the emaciated coke whore look.

I must hav missed the memo.
but why can’t people get fur from DEAD animals?we dont hav to skin the live ones or kill the live ones to get fur…
y not just get em from the dead ones???!!!