Oh. dear.
This email came in today from PETA regarding a heated exchange between PETA VP Bruce Friedrich and Burberry’s Christopher Bailey on Monday night at a London College of Fashion talk moderated by Colin McDowell.
“After years of trying to reach executives at Burberry about the company’s use of fur—via polite letters as well as lively protests – and getting no response, PETA took the issue to Burberry designer Christopher Bailey personally Monday night when PETA VP Bruce Friedrich caught up with him at a London College of Fashion discussion. In front of more than 200 students, Friedrich confronted Bailey about his continued use of fur and refusal to meet with PETA. Below is Friedrich’s play-by-play.
“Event started at 6 p.m… It was “a discussion” about men’s fashion moderated by Colin McDowell of the Sunday Times. After about 30 minutes of talk about trends, I raised my hand:
Mr. McDowell said, “Oh good, a question! Yes. Oh and you’re prepared, you have notes! Please wait for the microphone so that everyone can hear you”
Me: Do you mind if I take the discussion in a slightly different direction?
McDowell: No no, please do!
Me (reviewing my notes, which is how I know exactly what I said—I had the microphone and spoke very slowly): I have a question for Mr. Bailey about morality in fashion. [Bailey starts to look nervous]. Specifically, fur farming is so cruel to animals that it is illegal in the UK and many other countries, yet you continue to put it into Burberry’s collections. Animals are anally and vaginally electrocuted and skinned alive [gasps], and you seem not to care at all. Is there any abuse of animals so hideous that you would object? For those who are interested, there is video and documentation available at BloodyBurberry.com.
Bailey: I would be happy to have that discussion with you, but not here.
McDowell (blustering, livid, bursts out): Now I have a question for you—What gives you the right to come in here, what relevance does that question have to the issue of men’s fashion. Take his microphone away!
Me: Well you asked me a question, so please do me the courtesy of hearing my answer. [he looked like “oh shit, well that was stupid of me”] What Christopher Bailey pays people do to do to animals on some of the worst fur farms you can imagine, would put him in jail for cruelty to animals if he were paying people to do it to dogs or cats. The fur industry is a violent bloody industry that skins animals alive and crams them into crates where they go insane, and he supports it. Every time and everyplace is appropriate for this discussion.
McDowell: Well he says he’ll talk w/you about it later. This is not the time.
Me: He told us that before and then he didn’t return our calls or reply to our letters.
McDowell: You have made your point. You’ve done what you came here to do. You are welcome to stay or go, but we will not be discussion this issue at this forum. [thunderous applause, though til this point, you could hear a pin drop].
“About 10 minutes later I walked up and slipped Bailey one of our Burberry leaflets and a note that read “Please make good on your promise this time. You told us you’d meet with us before; this time please call” and gave him my contact info. McDowell looked very concerned as I walked up. When they finished up, I was able to go up and have a very heated exchange with him, our faces about 5 inches apart, in front of the line of people who had come for his autograph.
Me: I hope you will meet with us; I think if you saw these fur farms, if you really understood the horrible abuse of animals involved in the fur industry, you’d agree to stop designing with this cruel material.
Bailey (moving in and putting his face about 5 inches from mine—very angry and intense): What gives you the right to come in here and hijack this event and take over everything and disrupt it and ruin this event? This is not the place for this discussion.
Me: You told us you’d meet with us and then you backed out. I hope you will call or email me to set up a meeting; you are supporting horrible cruelty.
Bailey: I have to talk with other people. You have no style [yes, he actually said “you have no style”; maybe he meant “class”?]
It was pretty bizarre—everyone on line for an autograph from Bailey took a Burberry leaflet from me (including Bailey and his handler and Jeremy Langmead, the editor of Esquire, who was sharing the stage with him.)”
Well well, what do we think of that?
[CLARIFICATION: Just to be clear, the above exchange was between the VP of PETA and Christopher Bailey. I’m just reporting it, I didn’t have a row with Mr Bailey!]
4 June, 2008 @ 8:54 pm
I am going to have to side with Chris and Colin on this one. PETA have done themselves no favours. I believe they have a point however the way they go about it, wins them no support and in fact actively alienates those who may be sympathetic to their cause.
4 June, 2008 @ 10:08 pm
wow
5 June, 2008 @ 12:02 am
oh shiiiii. i’m not particularly on any sides with the fur issue–i wear vintage fur and bailey’s creations are beautiful to me. I don’t really trust Peta, and this doesn’t exactly win me over.
5 June, 2008 @ 1:17 am
Wow again. What an intense episode. I personally love fur so perhaps I’m too biased to pass judgement. The “You have no style!” is kind of priceless,though,isn’t it?
5 June, 2008 @ 2:55 am
Very explosive.
I’ve often wondered about PETA’s methods.
While I do get their point, I feel their guerilla tactics are very perverse. How would they feel if roles were reversed? I can’t imagine the members of PETA appreciating their offices, clothes, homes, or business functions being assaulted the same way they assault those of others.
And here’s something: I wonder if anyone in PETA wear leather shoes, belts, or carry leather bags or wallets?
5 June, 2008 @ 4:31 am
peta are something of a joke. very much agreed that they probably do themselves more harm than good. that’s a rather funny exchange though
5 June, 2008 @ 5:12 am
i find PETA people a little too much in some cases. Like when they did that website on the Olsen twins; really, too much.
In any case, although I’m not against fur per se, i’m TOTALLY against the cruelty on animals so I back up PETA in that point (anally and vaginally electrocuted and skinned alive??), so this is a very tricky subject; how do you second a certain position without criticizing the opposite?
Is there a way to kill the animals without cruelty? Is there a way to raise them in good and healthy conditions? (I actually wonder what’s the reason of cram the animals into crates, what’s the point?), why don’t we just use fake fur?
So many questions to answer…
5 June, 2008 @ 5:24 am
I think “whoa”. Sometimes I think PETA really defeats the purpose of what they’re trying to do with their shenanigans. . . I’m pretty anti-fur myself. . .I think it’s gross and cruel (to each their own, I suppose). But at the same time, if Bailey promised to talk with them and backed out. . .he was kind of asking for it. Don’t make promises you have no intentions of keeping!
5 June, 2008 @ 7:29 am
Well, I find it all very amusing and don’t think Bailey or McDowell handled it very well, no need to get annoyed. If Bailey hadn’t reurne calls or met with PETA what does he expect, they are focused and will pursue the cause. It’s not my cause but I don’t do fur as a personal choice.
I’m suprised no one was there to ask how Bailey can design for a company that recently announced record profits a year after closing the last Burberry factory in Tredegar South Wales and causing 300 people to lose their jobs in a high unemployment area to outsource to far east.
I’ve boycotted Burberry ever since that decision even when Bailey has turned outsome stunning numbers. I don’t hold him responsible for a minute, nor for the production of clothing in fur – it’s market forces.
I think people have views and some have causes and if your a designer don’t live in a bubble!
5 June, 2008 @ 7:29 am
Well, I find it all very amusing and don’t think Bailey or McDowell handled it very well, no need to get annoyed. If Bailey hadn’t reurne calls or met with PETA what does he expect, they are focused and will pursue the cause. It’s not my cause but I don’t do fur as a personal choice.
I’m suprised no one was there to ask how Bailey can design for a company that recently announced record profits a year after closing the last Burberry factory in Tredegar South Wales and causing 300 people to lose their jobs in a high unemployment area to outsource to far east.
I’ve boycotted Burberry ever since that decision even when Bailey has turned outsome stunning numbers. I don’t hold him responsible for a minute, nor for the production of clothing in fur – it’s market forces.
I think people have views and some have causes and if your a designer don’t live in a bubble!
5 June, 2008 @ 7:29 am
Well, I find it all very amusing and don’t think Bailey or McDowell handled it very well, no need to get annoyed. If Bailey hadn’t reurne calls or met with PETA what does he expect, they are focused and will pursue the cause. It’s not my cause but I don’t do fur as a personal choice.
I’m suprised no one was there to ask how Bailey can design for a company that recently announced record profits a year after closing the last Burberry factory in Tredegar South Wales and causing 300 people to lose their jobs in a high unemployment area to outsource to far east.
I’ve boycotted Burberry ever since that decision even when Bailey has turned outsome stunning numbers. I don’t hold him responsible for a minute, nor for the production of clothing in fur – it’s market forces.
I think people have views and some have causes and if your a designer don’t live in a bubble!
5 June, 2008 @ 7:29 am
Well, I find it all very amusing and don’t think Bailey or McDowell handled it very well, no need to get annoyed. If Bailey hadn’t reurne calls or met with PETA what does he expect, they are focused and will pursue the cause. It’s not my cause but I don’t do fur as a personal choice.
I’m suprised no one was there to ask how Bailey can design for a company that recently announced record profits a year after closing the last Burberry factory in Tredegar South Wales and causing 300 people to lose their jobs in a high unemployment area to outsource to far east.
I’ve boycotted Burberry ever since that decision even when Bailey has turned outsome stunning numbers. I don’t hold him responsible for a minute, nor for the production of clothing in fur – it’s market forces.
I think people have views and some have causes and if your a designer don’t live in a bubble!
5 June, 2008 @ 9:15 am
I think it was a really great idea to confront Christopher Bailey in this way if he has dodged the question for so long. It is not in any way acceptable to torture and exploit animals in this way. Fashion is not above judgement simply because what they produce looks DIVINE. I can’t believe people are so lame and nonchalent about this. People always use that leather bags and belts arguement as well which is also lame, leather is a by-product of meat. Fur is murder for the vanity of stupid rich people.
5 June, 2008 @ 9:21 am
The problem is,the PETA guy who wrote it is obviously very biased, so if this came from a more reliable source I would be inclined to think how sensible and reasonable he sounds, never shouting etc.
You see, I do dislike the PETA ‘guerilla tactis’ as enc calls them, but that description does not sound very guerilla-like does it?
5 June, 2008 @ 1:21 pm
pretty face is right that this account is certainly biased. However, I think that the PETA guy was right that if you do things like that to animals, or pay people to do such things, then you should be open for discussion about it anytime, anyplace.
5 June, 2008 @ 1:42 pm
I am against animal cruelty but I am against PETA way more. Their methods are often so disrespectful and ridiculous that they are hurting their cause more than they are doing any good.
5 June, 2008 @ 3:50 pm
I think there are ways of going about to get your point across but this just makes PETA look beyond ridiculous….
5 June, 2008 @ 5:34 pm
all that are good for animals and environment are good :)
great post!
a kiss!
5 June, 2008 @ 7:07 pm
I don’t always agree with PETA’s methods, but I don’t find his intervention out of place at all.
I never regarded Bailey as petulant or arrogant, but if he really said the words “You have no style” I might change my mind.
6 June, 2008 @ 2:18 am
Thank you for this post, it made an emotional and rather enjoyable read at the same time. I don’t know too much about the methods of fur farming so I wont set myself up for criticism, however I’m sure there are less cruel methods if the fashion world must have real fur and if it was banned altogether would faux be so bad? Just a thought. There are worst things in life than living without a fur garment no? But the whole escapade…imagine being a student at that talk! Especially fashion journalists. Dictaphone – check!
6 June, 2008 @ 2:26 am
It’s a bit hypocritical that PETA which advocates on respecting the rights of animals, aren’t respecting the right of people to have an opinion or to choose.
7 June, 2008 @ 8:17 pm
I’m interested that there are some of the fashion bloggers who are quite dismissive of an organisation for taking direct action during a fashion talk. Why is this ridiculous? What would be more acceptable and therefore les ridiculous.
Why have PETA done themselves no favours? With whom?
I actually have had my eyes opened. Yes I’m sure that the email is biased but how else are they going to get anyones attention. In fact how do they get attention, oh by direct action.
One hopes that Bailey really didn’t say you have no style. PETA did hijack an event and I understand that on one level it must be a shame for those who were expecting a bit of a meandering talk and questions but hwo exciting to have such a drama as well.
I think causing a distrubtion at a talk has to be put into perspective by those who blow people up. PETA have committed no crime and just offended a few fashionistas.
How brave are the other fashion bloggers who have not got uppity and have probably damaged themselves for not siding with Chris and Colin.
7 June, 2008 @ 8:25 pm
I’m not a big fan of fur (it’s kind of irrelevant where I am anyway) and I’m certainly no fan of PETA, but I really wish there was someone who could be as persistent in forcing designers to confront the issue of why their models (I’m thinking of Natalia Vodianova and Ali Michael depriving themselves of food while on the job) have to starve. And while I don’t think Christopher Bailey or the moderator handled it well either, I’d be loath to believe a one-sided account that partly amounts to PETA propaganda (I respect their commitment to their issues, but like I sais- I’m really not a fan of the organisation).
8 June, 2008 @ 9:04 am
this is an intereting debate. Lots of interesting diverse views. I love the information I’ve gained.
PETA bore me but then any organised thing does. I like the idea of collective engagement. I admire not buying from somewhere because of your belief.
I agree about not using fur bred for fashion. Personally crocodile and python skin is a something i steer away from as well. A remedy for allowing model to eat would be a miracle but much need outcome and on the subject of models – where are the black girls. The only designer who consistently uses them is DVF and then its only one or two – are they confined to the b list catwalks of retailers?
Lots of issues for the fashion industry to address and address them soon they must.
8 June, 2008 @ 10:13 am
Sometimes PETA can take things to far. However, on this occasion I don’t believe they did.
If they had tried through normal methods to make contact and discuss their concerns with Burberry as they claimed, then they weren’t left with many options to get their point across.
Fur is cruel. The animals used in this trade suffer terrible discomfort at their end (to put it mildly!). If Bailey had to suffer some discomfort in the form of a few questions, I can’t feel sorry for him.
9 June, 2008 @ 7:16 pm
hhhmmm very interesting indeed. i wear vintage fur that has been handed down to me and try my best to believe that the animal died of natural causes – it seems to help me to think that way. PETA No comment this time. xf
11 June, 2008 @ 11:17 pm
oh dear.
christopher and colin really don’t seem to have handled that episode very well.
it would have been a great opportunity for Bailey, in front of the audience to show that he could handle such a question, but ends up coming across as a bit of a coward.
i’m intrigued by this debate. And also rather surprised that so many seem somewhat anti-PETA. they have vigorous techniques, but that is what direct protest is all about, surely. i don’t think they did anything wrong in the big scheme of things, and i completely agree with anonymous, who says this.
thank you, DRG for kickstarting such a heated and interesting discussion!