Fashion

Fashion is a term used to denote a contemporary style or habit, especially with regard to shoes, jewelry, footwear, furniture, and body piercing, among other things. It is characterized as a distinct and habitual pattern in a person's dressing style as well as other prevalent styles in an individual's behaviour (Volino, Cordier and Magnenat-Thalmann 594). In addition, fashion can refer to the most recent creation of textile designers. Various trends are established in fashion design. The seasons can be defined as winter or spring. In general, fashion design is considered to have begun during the 19th century by Charles Frederick, the father of Haute-Couture, the designer who had his designs label sewed into garments created (Yuniya 1). Design process from initiation to the final product is a concept that takes several months. In design, the use of different raw materials can be involved in the production of the final materials. Some of these raw materials are gotten from living things such as animals for instance cows among other animals.
Thesis Statement: Even though the use of real fur and leather is fashionable, it should, however, be banned in the factories.

Discussion
The world is always experiencing changes. Similarly, our consumption habits are as well changing. For instance, the effects of global warming are continuously worsening, and most consumers are considering rethinking what products they buy and the amount (Logan, Régnière and Powell 132). Some people are questing as to whether we should eat animals or wear products that are as a result of their fur. Many people question the ethical aspect of using animals in the production of raw materials that are utilized in the design. According to other groups of individuals, if animals are properly used, they are not exposed to the risk of extinction. This means that none of the animals are being misused.

The use of animals is an integral part of the life of an individual; in fact, it is linked to certain important products in our daily lives. Some of these may include clothing, food, and medication (Solavan et al). Animals can be used in medical testing to find cures to diseases that threaten the life a human being. Animals are eaten, and some people question the reason as to why this is done. There is a lot of evidence that this is a process that can be completed without the planet being subjected to any harm. The land is considered to be better suited for pasture more than cultivation. Also, manure from animals is also used as means of replenishing the soil for purposes of supporting the growth of crops.

Fashion may not be seen as an essential thing; however, clothing is an important aspect. Clothing fulfills the need to keep warm especially when the weather is not favorable since this is a matter of death and life (Hildegunn 1). If one is living in a country that can be considered as a cold, clothing will form an important need for the purposes of protecting the individual from such elements. Choices should revolve around real fur and leather or faux and leather. If as human beings, if we care for our surrounding, it is important to consider and buy sustainable fashion products that we use in the process of production which is not harmful to our environment which is biodegradable and long-lasting.

In this argumentative essay concerning the subject that has been provided, there are various advantages and disadvantages of using fur and leather in fashion and design sector. However, in support of the thesis statement that I have developed, I will provide several arguments that act in support of this declaration. The first point is that individuals who wear fur from other animals look more stupid. This is because if people oppose the wearing another person's skin but the same people encourage the wearing of clothing made of skin from other living things such as cattle. This is a hypocritical behavior because the skin is skin be it from someone else such as cattle. The essential thing is that the use of cattle skin is wrong. It is unethical to take a skin from something without seeking permission from that thing (Devinney 278). Evidently, none of the animals can issue permission so that their skins are taken to be used in the clothing industries.
It is only fair that as human beings we do to our colleague's things that we may feel happy when are done to us. It is unethical to subject animals to such pain as forcing the removal of their skin only to be used in design and fashion industries for the production of clothing that is used by human beings. Both human beings and animals belong to the category of living things. Every life should be considered to be important in its way, and therefore each life should be valued. This is the first reason that argues in support in favor of the thesis statement that I have developed at the beginning of these argumentative essays. I think that we should act with morals and ethics in our ways of handling other living things. Therefore, conclusively, I believe it is important to ban the use of fur and leather in industries that produced cloths which are used by human beings to cope with the trends of fashions that are currently in the market.


Secondly, according to fur adverts that are put in commercial magazines, fur coats are portrayed to be a symbol of elegance. However, on the contrary, the ads have failed to show how the original owners of such coats came across their deaths that can be described to be gruesome. Several fur breathing animals such as minks, raccoons, otters, and foxes among others are brutally killed every year on the fur farms by vaginal and anal electrocution (Council Directive).
Others are killed in a wild way such as through beating, trapping and drowning. If an animal is to be successfully executed without tampering with its fur, trappers generally opt to strangle, stomp or beat them to death. The methods mentioned above are not entirely effective as some of the animals may sometimes come back to life as they are being skinned. This practice, therefore, endangers the lives of many animals to the extent that it could lead to the total extinction of the animals.


Another crucial point that is worth being considered when it comes to the use of fur in fashion and design industries is its impact on health. The use of fur can be associated with a lot of health hazards (Pryce et al 653). Even though the utilization of fur in fashion and design industries has to some extent minimize the danger of transfer of animal diseases to the fur workers, it is, however, important to note that diseases such as anthrax are likely to occur. This can mainly be seen among the workers that are responsible for the handling of the carcasses, hides, skins or hairs of the dead animals whose fur is to be put to use in the industries. In as much as a vaccine may be administered, still, there are chances that these workers can handle the dead bodies of these animals. Evidently, this is one way in which the use of animal fur places the lives of the industrial workers in danger.


On the same point of health hazards, various chemicals that are put to use in the fur industries are capable of irritating individual's skins (US Department of Health and Human Services). Some of these chemicals may include alum, acids, alkalis, bleaching agents, salt and oils among other varieties of chemicals that can be involved in the process of dyeing which might comprise of various categories of dyes and mordant (Hsiou-Lien and Burns 252). Also, irritant dust can also result due to the processes such as unpacking of bales especially those that have been treated using dusting powders, plucking, shearing, unhairing and drumming.

In dye kitchens and houses particularly when there is copper, salts of lead, and chromium being weighed and cooked, another potential risk that individuals can be exposed to is the risk of ingesting toxic dust. Besides, there is also an injurious vapor which may be due to the decreasing of various solvents and chemicals which are known to be having a fumigating impact. Finally, there are also chances of developing g contact sensitization also known as an allergy to some of the chemicals that are being used or to the dust that is produced or o any other type of fur that is under the process of production.


Ideally, all the aspects that have been discussed in this section portray the sense of how much the use of fur in fashion and design industries to produce final products can adversely impact the health conditions of various individuals. It is evident that during the production process, a lot of activities are involved which have various byproducts as a result. For instance, there is the production of dust in the process which may lead to allergy leading to individuals contacting various diseases such as asthma among others.


Also, there is the utilization of various chemicals such as acids which may have burning effects on the skins of workers in case of an accidental spillage on the body of the employees (Elizabeth). These among others have a detrimental impact on the health of individuals thereby summing it up to the hazardous health impact that is in support of the formulated thesis at the beginning of this discussion paper. I, therefore, believe that the use of fur and leather should be condemned and not be supported at any given instance due to the negative impacts that the process has on the health conditions of employees.
The third point that I would illustrate in support of the position that I have taken regarding the argumentative discussion that is presented in this assignment is the direct impact that the use of fur has to the environment. It is a fact that the use of fur directly damages our surrounding. In as much as animal fur farming has proven to be profitable for the farms which engage in the activity, it, however, has proven to be disastrous to the environment and the entire planet (McCafferty et al 284). Fur advertisings claim in their ads that the process is friendly to our environment. This is, however, a fallacy of its kind and is deemed to be some of the critical false advertisement in place that is being aired by the Committee of advertising standards in Holland, England, Denmark, and Italy.


The first way to support this position is that in itself, the intensive confinement of the animals from which the fur is obtained has always raised environmental concerns. Thousands of animals are being kept in such small areas. The buildup of a possible increment then becomes apparent, and this means that it may be soaked into the soil thereby ending up into the levels of the groundwater. Alternatively, this can run-off to the nearby rivers and streams when heavy rains are experienced. When this reaches the groundwater levels, there is an obvious health risk since it will be involved in the contamination of the groundwater which in most cases circulates into other water bodies such as rivers and streams to be used by people for various purposes such as domestic consumption.


For instance, Finland is the known largest producer of a fox. The national board of waters and the environment reportedly confirmed that still there are remarkable environmental problems within the functioning farms that are dealing with fur. This is an evident confirmation that fur industries contribute massively to the pollution of the environment thereby resulting in the degradation of eth natural resources. This pollution can also be responsible for a particular disease that can put the health of many people at risk.

Also, nitrogen from fur farms also acts as serious impediments to the wintering of trees. This translates to frost damage and insects can easily get access to trees thereby weakening their stems. Besides, as another confirmation that fur farms are major contributors to pollution, according to research, fur farms in Finland produce up to 1,500 tons of ammonia each year (Ari et al. 640). Also, after the skinning of the carcasses, most farms carelessly dispose them to water bodies, landfills or wood among other areas in which they can easily be carried to the large water bodies that are being used by most people for domestic purposes such as cooking and drinking. This, therefore, means that fur factories industries are playing a significant role in endangering the surrounding within which we live as human beings thereby exposing us to many dangers as well of contracting dangerous diseases.


Real fur has also been confirmed to be having more detrimental impacts on the environment as compared to the fake fur. This is because when real fur is to be made, it is a requirement that a lot of energy is gathered in the entire process and also to be shipped. In fact, according to researchers, approximately 80-95% of the fur is shipped to China a place where there are no strict environmental regulations (Li and Yin 2375). Besides, in China, there are also no strict animal welfare regulations among other lawful issues that must be considered in most of the countries across the globe.
A lot of fur companies will tell lies to the members of the public that it is green because these firms obtain huge sums of money from companies such as those for oil, tobacco among others. They tell lies to these companies that it is a good idea and find ways to get away with it as their main aim is to make big money from this business. Individuals who fall into their traps are branded as an oxymoron or brain-deaded morons. Fur companies practice hypocrisy of high level. In fact, the most recent fur coats are either on polyester or any other human-made petroleum based coats with real fur on such being trimmed and these trappers failing to inform the members of the public concerning things that the petrol-made coats contain fur on them.


Besides, most paints on the market today are made of Latex. If an individual throws oil another person wearing a fake fur coat, this puts the life of the person to higher risk as oil is regarded to flammable and carcinogen and can lead to fire break out at any time leading to the individual sustaining a lot of burns and injuries on their body. In fact, this could lead to the ultimate loss of the life of the individual.


This point provides an adequate back up to the thesis formulated in this argumentative essay paper affirming the position of the thesis that the use of fur and leather should be banned. As articulated, real fur is detrimental to the environment. In fact, in countries that have strict environmental regulations, the use of real fur would not be upheld due to the environmental concerns that it raises. Fur companies are aware of the dangers to which their products expose our surrounding. They have however ignored such concerns and proceeded to deceive the members of the public that it is green and harmless.
This has shown heir selfishness and love for money that they have only become concerned about their individual affairs forgetting about the environmental concerns that are raised by their activities. In addition, if any reaction takes place between real and fake fur, this could be harmful as it has already been explained especially to the individuals that are putting on fake fur. The result could be flammable which can lead to burns and serious injuries to the skin of the victim.

The final basis of the argument is in consideration of the economic aspect of it to the consumers. In as much as products from fur that come from fashion and design industries look cool and classy, they are however expensive and are not likely to be afforded by most people (Hannelore et al). This is a crucial aspect of this essay as it shows the marginalization concept in the fur industries. People from low-income families are left out of the equation as they cannot afford the fur products. It is evident that a greater percentage of people across the globe fall in the class of low-income earners.


This, therefore, means that fur business will only work to the advantage of a few individuals. From an individual perspective, I think that for inclusivity, it is crucial to ban the use of fur so that the category of low-income individuals does not feel left out especially in a case where people meet at certain common occasions. Some people will look more elegant as compared to the other group. This compromises the aspect of uniformity that may be needed in certain cases in such events.

Conclusion
Conclusively, as I have stated in the thesis statement, the use of fur and leather should be banned. This is due to some of the various crucial points that I have covered in the essay body in support of my position. First, from the arguments presented, it is evident that fur clothes are detrimental rather than being of any benefits not only to the people but also to the animals and the environment in its entirety. The production of fur is a pervasive process. In this, for instance, a million deaths of different animals are caused across the globe. The killing of these animals can lead to many dangers, for instance, this could result in a complete extinction of such animals like foxes, chinchillas, and minxes among others. In addition, the death of these animals causes a serious imbalance in the ecosystem. Other than the negative impacts on people and animals, fur farms also have the same adverse impacts on the environment including water bodies, air, and land. These establishments are in a position of causing various diseases as already discussed in the body of the argumentative essay especially due to the emission of harmful gases such as ammonia among other things such irritant dust. Finally, the production of fur involves the production of various harmful chemicals that are harmful to the health of the people as well as the environment. It is only ethical to leave the skins of other living things just like our skins have been left without being tampered with to facilitate any production processes.

















Works Cited
Belk, Russell W., Timothy Devinney, and Giana Eckhardt. "Consumer ethics across cultures." Consumption Markets & Culture 8.3 (2005): 275-289.
Chen, Hsiou-Lien, and Leslie Davis Burns. "Environmental analysis of textile products." Clothing and Textiles Research Journal 24.3 (2006): 248-261.
Directive, Council. "Council Directive 93/119/EC of 22 december 1993 on the protection of animals at the time of slaughter or killing." (2003).
Eberle, Hannelore, et al. "Clothing technology." Beuth-Verlag GmbH, Berlin(2004).
Ferm, Ari, et al. "Effects of high nitrogen deposition on forests: Case studies close to fur animal farms." Acidification in Finland. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 1990. 635-668.
Kawamura, Yuniya. Fashion-ology: an introduction to fashion studies. Berg, 2004.
Logan, Jesse A., Jacques Régnière, and James A. Powell. "Assessing the impacts of global warming on forest pest dynamics." Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 1.3 (2003): 130-137.
McCafferty, Dominic J., et al. "Foraging responses of Antarctic fur seals to changes in the marine environment." Marine Ecology Progress Series (1998): 285-299.
Nordås, Hildegunn Kyvik. The global textile and clothing industry post the agreement on textiles and clothing. No. 5. WTO discussion paper, 2004.
Pryce, Christopher R., et al. "Long-term effects of early-life environmental manipulations in rodents and primates: potential animal models in depression research." Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews 29.4 (2005): 649-674.
Solavan, A., et al. "Traditional therapeutic uses of animals among tribal population of Tamil Nadu." (2004).
US Department of Health and Human Services. "The health consequences of involuntary exposure to tobacco smoke: a report of the Surgeon General." Atlanta, GA: US Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Coordinating Center for Health Promotion, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Office on Smoking and Health 709 (2006).
Volino, Pascal, Frederic Cordier, and Nadia Magnenat-Thalmann. "From early virtual garment simulation to interactive fashion design." Computer-aided design 37.6 (2005): 593-608.
Wilson, Elizabeth. Adorned in dreams: Fashion and modernity. IB Tauris, 2003.
Zhang, Li, and Feng Yin. "Wildlife consumption and conservation awareness in China: a long way to go." Biodiversity and conservation 23.9 (2014): 2371-2381.