Should the British Ministry of Defense replace outfitted royal guards' real bear fur with fake fur?

Yes

1 of 4

by Aldo Bonincontro

• 

Write now Print Invite a writer™ Add to Favorites RSS Feed Contact this writer

Traditions must be respected and preserved only when they don't cause death or suffering to human and animal beings and must be changed when necessary.
Also human sacrifices, cannibalism, gladiator fights, duels to resolve private contrasts were considered traditions, but they have been eventually abolished and fought as barbarian or inhuman uses, as most of people realized all the damage done.

Human cruelty has no limits, as we should know and has always made many victims among animals, denying them the dignity and even the right to live.
Bear fur used for the uniforms of the English royal guards is only a little but meaningful example of this cruelty and it has become a tradition because its use, together with bears killing, was performed with a total indifference about its meaning.

Personally, I'm contrary to every use of animal fur or leather because totally useless (today, replaced by more efficient synthetic materials against cold) and only an expensive luxury for the caprices of rich people; so, also bear fur for these traditional uniforms can be easily replaced with synthetic fur, easily produced with the same appearance of the original one from bears and whatever other animal.
This would save the life to a limited number of bears, given that the production of these uniforms is not surely on a large scale but it's also the principle that counts and, in any case, it would be a little conquest for our civilization, toward a better relation between us and animals.

Bears of all species are more or less endangered in all the world today; from the great white bear of the Arctic Ocean to the brown bear of the Apennines, in Italy (my Country), a sub-species of the European brown bear, reduced to only 40-50 individuals in the National Parks of Abruzzi, Italy, by legal and illegal hunting and by the reduction of its habitat.
Surely, replacing the bear fur of these uniforms with synthetic fur, nobody will notice the difference and the tradition and the history represented by these uniforms and by whom wear them will not be changed or contamined.

The British Ministry of Defense can surely adopt this decision, on the more reason, considering that it's ruled by a Minister belonging to the Labour Party who should be (but I would say better: "must be") more sensible to animal defense and respect; the fake fur in soldiers' uniforms doesn't decrease their military efficiency or prestige, if this were the worry of the Ministry.

England has already banned fox hunting recently, another ancient but cruel tradition, despite the opposition of the most traditionalist people who always see as a catastrophe every change in social habits, rituals or traditions.
This is surely an encouraging precedent for this new problem to resolve and I can be optimist about it.

I don't know at what point is this battle against bear fur use but, from what I know about England, the traditionalist opposition will be again strong, if this change hasn't been adopted yet today, after so many years of animalist battles for animal rights.

Another favourable argument to this replacement is that fake fur is surely much cheaper than the original bear fur and saving some money (together bears' life) would be a good argument for the British Ministry of Defense.

Learn more about this author, Aldo Bonincontro.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.