Johnny Weir vs Friends of Animals | Golden Skate

Johnny Weir vs Friends of Animals

Joined
Mar 14, 2006
I'm on the animals' side. Johnny will not suffer in any way, shape or form if he loses the fur so it is not a matter of putting "animals above" humans. This is purely frivolous killing.
 

Tonichelle

Idita-Rock-n-Roll
Record Breaker
Joined
Jun 27, 2003
no, I agree that fur just for fashion isn't exactly a needed killing...

but groups like this one go a bit too far in their plight IMO. But, I'm an Alaskan, we aren't big fans of these groups, and the feeling is mutual.
 

Mafke

Medalist
Joined
Mar 22, 2004
I'm okay with them asking (even repeatedly), as long as they do so politely and are willing to (sooner or later) take no for an answer.

I'm okay with him following or ignoring their request (or politely declining to follow it).
 

skatingbc

Final Flight
Joined
Jan 2, 2009
The fur debate is always interesting. We learned a lot about the industry and its roots in high school. One thing our teacher always reminded us of was that Canada was basically founded on the fur trade. The Hudson's Bay Company was founded in 1670, largely because of the fur trade and the demand coming from specifically, Britain. While fur is most definitely not for me, the fur trade was a huge contributing factor to the exploration and development of my country.
 

Medusa

Record Breaker
Joined
Jan 6, 2007
On the one hand I want to say: "People, put your energy behind something that saves and improves people's lives."

But on the other hand it's not a big deal to refuse wearing animal products from animals, that are clearly only killed for the vanity of humans.

So I think I agree with the group.
 

silverling

Rinkside
Joined
Dec 6, 2009
No, They are not asking him politely

I'm okay with them asking (even repeatedly), as long as they do so politely and are willing to (sooner or later) take no for an answer.

I'm okay with him following or ignoring their request (or politely declining to follow it).


No, They are not asking him politely. Actually it's completely opposite. Go to Weir's Facebook and see What they had said to him. What they had done to him.(this past week) What they are doing to him. They amazingly harassed him. They threatened him repeatedly. They swore to him a lot. They called him looser. They called him jackass and... I mean lots of much more worse words than this. It was horrible. They were so dirty. Poor Johnny. They used every bad words to him and to call him. They even made falsehoods that he clearly didn't do. They said they will boycott him playing Vancouver in his Facebook repeatedly. They are no where asking him politely. They have no respect for him as an athlete who is happy to represent US. They have no repect for him even as an human!
They posted it so much repeatedly. They attacked him so much repeatedly. It was clearly harassing. It was clearly... They clearly disgraced themself very much. They keep insisting falsehoods ( media is their side, Johnny is losing people, Johnny joked about suffering and so on...) They keep posting it in his facebook, they keep calling him looser, Weird (There are lots of much more worse words than this in his facebook which all came from them and no other. How could animal group people use this words to Weir? They are so judgmental about him. They wish him break the leg.. they wished him fail...they wished him...(I don't remember..I mean.. more horrible things repeatedly). Weir got harassment. and Weir got threatening and got...what is it? (I don't know English words well..) This about 5 or 7? 10? people almost destroyed his Facebook fan page. They lied alot. They wrote that Johnny knocked an animal dead..and so on and on. They threatened Johnny that he will lose all people. They are threatening him that they will move to Paraz Hilton and other lots of media. They threatened him that they will move to Olympic organization.
and on and on and on. I think Weir definitely owe big apology from them.
Poor Weir as a human.
 
Last edited:

Medusa

Record Breaker
Joined
Jan 6, 2007
Johnny has been criticised often for wearing fur, he has laughed it off and remained unapologetic. As long as they don't resort to violence, I have no problem with organisations voicing their concerns. I am sure Johnny can take the heat.
 

Mafke

Medalist
Joined
Mar 22, 2004
No, They are not asking him politely. Actually it's completely opposite. --- I think Weir definitely owe big apology from them.
Poor Weir as a human.

Didn't know that. If that is the case, then screw 'em.

FULL FUR AHEAD, JOHNNY!!!!!!

(and I think being human carries very little weight with that kind of .... mentality).
 

silverling

Rinkside
Joined
Dec 6, 2009
well...

I mean how could they threat him boycotting, you will lose people, you will lose everyone, we will go to every media and so on. Wishing him break the leg. Threatening you will not be able to go to the Olympic. If you want to go to the Olympic you better listen to us… Wish you fail.. and so on. I couldn’t believe what they wrote in his Facebook fan page which is open. I felt pity for him. They deserve blame I think. I think what they had done to him over past week cannot be allowed.

and Talk about the timing, to the person who is infront of Olympic. He worked so hard for it. and they are saying to him they will mess up his olympic? I think they crossed line. They have no right to order him what to wear. It's a personal choice. They shoud have request him politely. and they shoud not have tease him this long, and this much. I think all have to leave him alone and let him concentrate on doing his best at the Olympics. Lysacek wore fur, too. It's a bit unfair. Poor Weir.


Johnny has been criticised often for wearing fur, he has laughed it off and remained unapologetic. As long as they don't resort to violence, I have no problem with organisations voicing their concerns. I am sure Johnny can take the heat.

Johnny can take the heat? How could you know for sure.. I mean deep down his inside. Johnny is only a human after all. Nobody knows whether he wasn’t hurt. and he seemed to be got his feeling really hurt by some media and some people in the past.
 
Last edited:

gio

Medalist
Joined
Jan 23, 2006
It's not just about killing animals for fur, but also how the animals are killed. Do we have the right to torture other beings just for our vanity?
 

janetfan

Match Penalty
Joined
May 15, 2009
It's not just about killing animals for fur, but also how the animals are killed. Do we have the right to torture other beings just for our vanity?

Johnny seems to think we do :disagree:
 

Buttercup

Record Breaker
Joined
Mar 25, 2008
Johnny is old enough and savvy enough to understand how his decision to wear fur will be perceived by many people. It's not against the law and he can do what he likes, but actions do have consequences and I'm not going to feel sorry for Johnny; this is something that could be anticipated and I'm sure Johnny has simply decided it's worth the hassle in order to do what he wants.

There's a huge difference between people living in extreme climates who need fur because there are no better options in those conditions, and between a skater who thinks it'll look pretty on his costume. There's no need for fur on any skating costume, and if Johnny really wanted that sort of look, he could have chosen faux fur. Since he didn't, any criticism he gets is fair game and frankly, free speech.
 
Last edited:

taylorfax

On the Ice
Joined
Nov 3, 2006
Don't all the skaters wear boots made of leather and every second coach rinkside a huge fur coat.
 

antmanb

Record Breaker
Joined
Feb 5, 2004
Johnny is old enough and savvy enough to understand how his decision to wear fur will be perceived by many people. It's not against the law and he can do what he likes, but actions do have consequences and I'm not going to feel sorry for Johnny; this is something that could be anticipated and I'm sure Johnny has simply decided it's worth the hassle in order to do what he wants.

There's a huge difference between people living in extreme climates who need fur because there are no better options in those conditions, and between a skater who thinks it'll look pretty on his costume. There's no need for fur on any skating costume, and if Johnny really wanted that sort of look, he could have chosen faux fur. Since he didn't, any criticism he gets is fair game and frankly, free speech.

:clap: :agree:

I couldn't agree more. This is more of the more of the same-old same-old attention seeking IMO. Was there any reason to talk about it in an interview? Without any reference to it would people have assumed it was fake fur?

Mentioning it specifically in a NY times interview, he knew it would get attention, Johnny knows what that means with animal rights campaigners...it picks up on publicity running up to the Olympics.

For the record I find the tiny bit of fur on Johnny's costume to be far less offensive than half the costumes in ice dance. Kohk&Nav's firebird anyone :laugh:

Ant
 

janetfan

Match Penalty
Joined
May 15, 2009
:clap: :agree:

I couldn't agree more. This is more of the more of the same-old same-old attention seeking IMO. Was there any reason to talk about it in an interview? Without any reference to it would people have assumed it was fake fur?

Mentioning it specifically in a NY times interview, he knew it would get attention, Johnny knows what that means with animal rights campaigners...it picks up on publicity running up to the Olympics.

Ant

It is easy to see how Johnny revels in being the "poster boy for bad taste."

No one talks much about his skating or considers him much of a medal contender in Vancouver so to keep attention on himself he depends on non-skating issues.

He says he has matured but he still seems desperate for attention much like a small child.
 

silverling

Rinkside
Joined
Dec 6, 2009
what?

:clap: :agree:

I couldn't agree more. This is more of the more of the same-old same-old attention seeking IMO. Was there any reason to talk about it in an interview? Without any reference to it would people have assumed it was fake fur?

Mentioning it specifically in a NY times interview, he knew it would get attention, Johnny knows what that means with animal rights campaigners...it picks up on publicity running up to the Olympics.

Ant

Mentioning it specifically in a NY times interview, he knew it would get attention---?? Was there any reason to talk about it in an interview? attention seeking IMO??

He would not have mentioned about it if a reporter didn't asked him about it. A reporter raised his hand(NY times reporter) and asked him about his fur. (and asked him to answer his quesion!)So he answered it is fox fur and explained why he used it. He answered quite shortly. (about 30 sec? ) Why is it attention seeking behavior?
 
Last edited:

Mafke

Medalist
Joined
Mar 22, 2004
If fur is an ethical issue, then why hasn't Tarasova been behind bars for years now?

I don't much care anymore about fur one way or the other. On the other hand, I'm becoming more insistent that debate about such issues be handled in a civil manner and it appears the anti-fur people are the ones who are out of line in this case.
 

Tinymavy15

Sinnerman for the win
Record Breaker
Joined
Dec 28, 2006
Personally I don't see why Johnny has to wear real animal fur all the time when women everywhere have all but given up thier fur coats, hats etc. Forget about being a role model, dosent he feel bad wearing something that has caused pain. Then again after watching his reality show again last night he does come across as juvinellie and self-centered.
 
Top