dumbass45601 Posted January 12, 2008 Share Posted January 12, 2008 I thought she was a fur lover but does this prove me wrong? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrMockle Posted January 12, 2008 Share Posted January 12, 2008 DA, If I remember from articles at the time, Dita said that she agreed with their stance on some the issue she is promoting but not on fur and she still wears furs - as has been shown a few times since that PETA campaign (see her performances at Erotica 2007 for an example). Regards, Mr Mockle Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 12, 2008 Share Posted January 12, 2008 So you're saying she's a hypocrite? OFF Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Worker 11811 Posted January 12, 2008 Share Posted January 12, 2008 No, I think she's just getting paid a lot of money to say what they ask her to. You might think that's hypocrisy and, technically, you would be right. But I think this is kind of a good thing because it shows that PeTA basically goes around paying people to be spokespeople for their cause. I hope that people will see this and understand that PeTA is about on par with cheezy infomercials who pay actors to go around and sell their crappy products on TV. So, yes it's hypocrisy but it's like fighting fire with fire. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrMockle Posted January 12, 2008 Share Posted January 12, 2008 OFF, I'm not sure she's necessarily a hypocrite but just chosing which issues to support and doesn't support all of their causes. A case of horses for courses I think; you don't have to agree with every aspect and opinion of an ideology or following to support them in general or even just for a specific cause (consider religions; political parties; sports teams). If she supported an anti-fur campaign by them and then continued to wear fur, that would be hypocritical. I think at the time of this campaign there were questions towards PETA as to why they would use someone who wears and continues to wear fur as a potential spokesperson. Regards, Mr Mockle Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dumbass45601 Posted January 16, 2008 Author Share Posted January 16, 2008 Thanks for addressing this issue I was quite confused on this one. PETA is nuts, I love how they were like oh Michael Vick we have these classes you can take and we will help you. Then they made that online Christmas card. A PETA spokesperson was on ESPN because of it and the interview was hilarious. He completely jumped around the questions trying to put his spin on them and Bob Levy asked the same question three straight times and never got an answer. They say one thing and do another like always. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brandy-uk Posted January 16, 2008 Share Posted January 16, 2008 It would seem a perfect vehicle to use Dita to promote PETA.. she glorifies an age where fur was glamourous ..and they hoped she would show that 'reproduction' or 'faux' could be as good.. but true to her form and dedication to her art , she falls back to the 'real' and 'beautiful' reality of fur... Perhaps what looked good as an advertising campaign on paper to PETA may not work out to be too favourable? Brandy xxxxx Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now