PETA launches "human" leather goods store that seems right out of a horror movie

No thanks, I prefer footwear that doesn’t get gingivitis.

1 Like

Came here to say this. PETA thinks human leather would look like it came out of a horror movie? Which is my other point - do they think this is shocking in this day and age? Badly photoshopped human faces and bloody stitching? Parts of Squid Game were more gruesome, FFS.


As a meat eater, I have formerly expressed my opinion about our cultural problem with our relationship to animals as food – concern over “cute” animals and/or cannibalism – and if I had a completely ethical stance I wouldn’t live in a house (as we know them) or drive motorized vehicles, either. But it’s difficult for any of us to go to that extreme, and hardly any human has the right to claim the ethical high road.

That said, this stance seems kind of silly, as leather as a by-product is readily available and provides usefulness after the point of death. Why not use human skin as we do cattle skins? And why not outlaw furs and “designer” animals for their skin if we aren’t using the rest of the animal for food and/or tools?
Again, I think it comes down to human’s fickle desire to hang on to the memory of relatives with casket burials and/or designated plots of land.

I also would go so far as to further extrapolate @Brainspore 's argument about living conditions for what I assume to be “food” animals and place much more concern on how we kill and dispose of carcasses, animal or human. IMHO, natural death is fair game, whereas carcasses derived from slavery or other means would be abhorrent.


I think primarily because we know how animals raised for their byproducts are treated and can easily see that happening to humans, too.

That’s a good idea. We should.

To be fair, this is something that humans (and our closest relatives before they died out) have been doing since we’ve been humans. We can certainly think of better and more sustainable ways to honor our dead and give us a space for such practices, but to imagine that we’re just going to give up meaningful funeral and memorial practices just like that is not really fair. I don’t think it’s just a “fickle desire” it’s a necessity to deal with grief. It does not need to look how it does today, but I think it’s such an ingrained part of our human existence that we aren’t likely to give it up altogether.

Sure. Makes sense to me. As long as it plays into our sense of closure around the death of loved ones, let’s come up with new options or lean into the ones that already exist.

Again, works for me!


PETA should make these photos into greeting cards.

True. I think I should have said “useless preservation of bodies” to explain what I mean.




Hey, one can still be a funeral director! And even alter practices to suit reclamation of bodies…:man_shrugging:


OK, you all know I hate trigger warnings. However, this… this post has a bunch of them.

I think a lot of it is also related to the concerns of human to human disease spread via usage of post mortem human material. Many of our deep cultural mores are related to the horrible outcomes that can happen if they are ignored, such as cannibalism, our death rites, and incest.

I will be honest. In terms of using human skin, bones, teeth, and flesh to make consumer products, at least for me, it brings up horror stories from Nazis who allegedly did such monstrous acts while systematically and brutally murdering millions of Jewish, Romani, and LGBTQ+ people.

Now, the evidence that the NAZIs did this is scant. There have been few if any artifacts found to support this. This has, however, been used as a shorthand to describe how evil, sick, twisted, just beyond fucked up the Nazis were. Even compared to killing millions of innocent people, this was used to show how sick they were.

And PETA just stepped right up into it and took on those reigns. Fuck Nazis, fuck PETA. They are the ones who chose to associate themselves here.


I think that’s what they are going for, honestly. They want to equate the suffering of animals to that of humans in situations like the holocaust. The thing is, that PETA doesn’t need to push that idea to push for greater compassion for animals. They like to use misogyny as well, to promote their cause. They’re just being edgelord assholes.


I mean, leather is gross as hell. I get it. Whenever I’m gifted a leather item by someone who doesn’t know me terribly well I have to suppress a shudder. I don’t know how someone can wear that shit without feeling like Ed Gein.

“Sorry, ma’am. The law says you can’t buy that coat until you eat at least 40 more weasels.”


Too thin.


I mean, it isn’t alleged, things like skin lamp shades and book binding exist. I don’t think there was a wide spread thing. But Jews and others were dehumanized enough that someone thought it was a good idea.

The practice wasn’t unique to Nazis, there are a handful of human skin bound books that have survived antiquity. Andrew Jackson had horse reins made of human skin after the battle of Horseshow Bend. And there have been other examples in the world both as cultural practices and monsters like the notorious Ed Gein - but it is, as you said, it is generally taboo and rare.

And certainly popular culture has used it as a trope in horror, everything from Evil Dead’s Necronomicon, to The Walking Dead’s Whipserers. So, yeah, not sure the Nazis have a monopoly on the practice or association. But PETA’s marketing MO seems to focus on being outrageous and shocking. IMO, often in bad taste.

The actual history is irrelevant here, because most people associate such things with the holocaust, not really anything else in history. They are intentionally equating animal cruelty with the holocaust. They’ve done the same with the Atlantic slave trade, too.


[quote=“Brainspore, post:32, topic:209600, full:true”]

Some years back my wife’s great-aunt was giving away many of her old possessions and repeatedly tried to gift my wife (a vegetarian at the time) with an antique, meticulously cared-for fur coat. It fit her beautifully but my wife refused to take it because she just couldn’t see herself wearing furs. So I don’t know what ended up happening to it. I think maybe she should have just thanked her aunt and accepted the coat to make her feel happier, then given it a secret burial like in Harry and the Hendersons or something. What’s the ethical thing to do with an existing product that was produced unethically?

1 Like

They call Greenpeace wacky leftists too.

I’m a wacky leftist and I can’t stand PETA.


Yeah, I don’t recommend crashing your motorcycle in a human skin jacket.

1 Like

Honestly, I don’t know, but I don’t think anyone should be forced to accept something out of politeness that goes against their personal code of ethics, honestly. I’m sure her great aunt meant well, but your wife was clearly uncomfortable with it.