Peta posts about Gaga

[PartySick 166,472]

32 minutes ago, SimonBaetens said:

It's an archive piece from 2009...

 

20 minutes ago, Decodekid said:

are these collections constantly in production or are they just old limited edition pieces?

 

18 minutes ago, nATAH said:

it's archive tho

I think it's also about the promotion of it. These pieces may be years old but wearing feathers, fur, or other animal products at all can "promote" the practice and generate sales, and therefore production, of pieces like them.

Rare semi-W from PETA, I guess. Or, it would be if their criticism meant anything 'cause they do nothing to help animals  

A valid point from a joke of an organization.

[nATAH 53,199]

3 minutes ago, PartySick said:

 

 

I think it's also about the promotion of it. These pieces may be years old but wearing feathers, fur, or other animal products at all can "promote" the practice and generate sales, and therefore production, of pieces like them.

Rare semi-W from PETA, I guess. Or, it would be if their criticism meant anything 'cause they do nothing to help animals  

A valid point from a joke of an organization.

if someone is rich enough to afford a gown of genuine feathers thanks to lady gaga, the ethics around fur/feathers likely never has or will bother them

[PartySick 166,472]

Just now, nATAH said:

if someone is rich enough to afford a gown of genuine feathers thanks to lady gaga, the ethics around fur/feathers likely never has or will bother them

I think using animal products is kinda becoming taboo regardless

[InTheCloset 21,082]

And dicque belongs in my mouth but i aint getting it so calm tf down peta 

[Lisbeth Salander 359]

I’m getting all nostalgic now. Feels like 00s 

So be it if a few birds had to be sacrificed for this slayage. Gay rights before animal rights 

Edited February 2 by Lisbeth Salander

[Gorehound 5,035]

Oh for god sake. Like there aren't more important things to concern about right now. 

I noticed they've only come for Gaga, when half the women at the Grammys were adorned with feathers this year. 

[Bronco 16,779]

37 minutes ago, NashvilleGAGA said:

I’ve been vegan for the better part of a decade. Gaga looked amazing, leave her alone. It was secondhand art, she didn’t pay for any animal suffering. 
 

(disclaimer. I am on a sauna right now and have very little service so can’t see the peta post. Regardless they are wrong and I side with Gaga. Her entire night last night is approved by this vegan monster)

((I would like to condemn the Grammys for not awarding Mayhem AOTY))

What kind of sauna 👀

[Bronco 16,779]

33 minutes ago, PartySick said:

 

 

I think it's also about the promotion of it. These pieces may be years old but wearing feathers, fur, or other animal products at all can "promote" the practice and generate sales, and therefore production, of pieces like them.

Rare semi-W from PETA, I guess. Or, it would be if their criticism meant anything 'cause they do nothing to help animals  

A valid point from a joke of an organization.

I agree with you to a point. But the only other option would be to force the destruction of all these archival pieces. 

Which then will just make the industry move to places that wont regulate it because they need the revenue. 

[PartySick 166,472]

1 minute ago, Bronco said:

I agree with you to a point. But the only other option would be to force the destruction of all these archival pieces. 

Which then will just make the industry move to places that wont regulate it because they need the revenue. 

Well, not necessarily. They could sit in a museum somewhere or something along with other historical pieces  

Somewhere where the context is "history" or a showcase of a famous designer's work rather than being worn actively on a stage.

I do also have to say this isn't a hill I care to die on, and I will die on nearly any hill PETA's a joke lmao

[Meruk Holland 2,332]

It wouldn't really matter if the outfit used real or fake feathers, PETA has stated many times that they are against the mere aesthetic of fur, feathers, and leather. They would denounce this outfit if it were completely ethical with fake feathers. 

They don't care if animals were actually hurt or killed, they just want to shame a woman for wearing something they don't aesthetically like

[RAMROD 112,815]

This thread reminds me to checke my socmed account, to see I am still blocked by PETA cos I defended Gaga back on the day. They can't  handle my heat 

[southpaw773 3,985]

One time PETA was stopping people on the street and I said not now I’m on the way to KFC

[River 121,605]

There's a difference between wearing an archived piece for a performance, when like most of the people wouldn't even notice the feathers and between rich people like Beyonce or J.Lo who are bragging about wearing fur (Bey even proudly mentioned it in Ring the Alarm "She gon' be rockin' chinchilla coats").

Bey and J.Lo still wearing fur to these days and

Bey killed so many animals through her career, if it's for her own made outfits, outfits of designers or clothes and shoes that she sold as part of her fashion brands (like Sting ray skin, anaconda skin and others)

 

But yeah, let's come to Gaga as usual lol

[weed 76,327]

2 hours ago, AVeryGagaHolyDick said:

They’re 100% right

The outfit looked fabulous but it would’ve looked just as fabulous with fake feathers 

 

fake feathers don't really exist! even those cheap neon feathers are real

[Mother of Puppies 36,540]

I’m sure they did not just use the feathers for the outfit. Those ducks (or whatever bird it was) were probably served as yummy food on Christmas Eve too. 

With some delicious potatoes, sauce & maybe a salad. Gawd I’m hungry now. 
 

so let’s not pretend that most of the world is vegan. Many of us eat meat on a weekly if not almost daily basis.

Edited February 2 by Mother of Puppies