So Maggie had an assignment yesterday that related to some book about the founders of the Audubon Society and (if I understood correctly) their crusade against the use of stuffed birds in fashion. The question posed to me was:
Do you think it is ok to kill an animal for fashion?
I found this rather a loaded question. Seeing as I thought it biased against those of us who might have a fur (or two) tucked away in the closet, I was very deliberate about my answer.
We discussed how people had been using animals for food and clothing for millions of years. We discussed how we personally had benefited from the death of a bird that night (yummy grilled chicken.) And how we had leather shoes, leather purses, leather jackets and fur coats in our closets.
I was sure to cover how animals raised for consumption, in food or products, needed to be treated humanely and killed in the most painless way possible.
To give time to the other side of the argument, we talked about how someone who didn't want to eat meat or wear animal products was well within their rights to do so. When I started to cover how the important thing was to respect other people's opinions and (basically) not be a busy body imposing your value system on the rest of the world, she looked at me and asked, quite pained at this point, "Can I be done with my homework now?"
This morning, I was packing her bag for school and was curious how our very balanced and wide ranging in scope conversation was put to paper. It was this.
"My Mom thinks they should be killed quickly instead of taking a long time to kill the animal. So she does believe [it is ok to kill an animal for fashion] because she likes her purse, shoes and fur coats."
That's Miss DeVille, if you're nasty.