Kate Middleton, PETA On The Same Side In Fur Debate

Most fur-loving celebrities, such as Rihanna and Kim Kardashian, try to steer clear of PETA whenever they can.

But the animal rights group, known for publicly chastising stars who dare to wear fur, actually took the side of a very famous face in a recent fur debate.

According to The Hollywood Reporter, a photograph of Kate Middleton wearing a fur-trimmed coat was posted on the Facebook page of the International Fur Trade Federation (IFTF). The pro-fur site praised Catherine for her "classy fur-lined coat" (we're guessing it was this one), gleeful to count the royal among its famous fur fans.

But PETA came to Kate's rescue by clearing Kate's fur-loving name: the classy, fuzzy trim on the jacket was fake. Representatives for the Duchess of Cambridge penned a letter to PETA, confirming:

"Her Royal Highness was not wearing fur. The coat was not lined with fur. We therefore insist that you remove the photo from your social media page and issue an immediate public retraction of your claim."

And when British royalty calls, you answer. The IFTF removed Kate's photo from its Facebook page and posted a brief apology:

The photograph of Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge was removed from our Facebook page as soon as we were made aware that the coat she was wearing was lined with fake fur.

So a win for PETA -- and for Kate, who can hope the animal rights organizations backs off for now. Last time their paths crossed, PETA sent the duchess a letter imploring her to halt a game birds shoot planned for Prince Harry's 27th birthday in September, begging the princess, "Please ask the Princes to open their hearts to the suffering of birds casually used as skeet and make the compassionate decision not to kill for fun."

Now it seems the duchess is back in PETA's good graces... at least for the time being. Let's hope her fur-loving sis, Pippa, didn't gift her any animal-related products for her birthday last month... or if she did, Kate has the sense not to wear them.

Read more at HollywoodReporter.com.

Comments

[olitenup]

04:32 PM on 03/11/2012

Outside the artic, fur for fashion is just wrong, wrong, wrong. That kim k, rhianna, j-lo, etc, are nothing but animal abusers, and quite frankly, so is anyone else who will have an animal killed to wear it.

[treabeton]

01:56 PM on 02/24/2012

Stay tuned for FURther news on this issue.

[KateB21]

05:18 AM on 02/24/2012

I find it very very hard to believe she has never worn fur and never does. I doubt neither she or her sister cares about the material of what they wear.

[David Daisy May Boldock]

09:51 AM on 02/24/2012

I concur wholeheartedly with you and if PETA are taking her side, it is only because of who she is!

[Jonathan Pestana]

10:02 PM on 03/13/2012

they took her side because it was fake fur, if she wears something real later then she will probably be back on their bad side

[David Daisy May Boldock]

03:40 AM on 03/14/2012

Fake fur or not Jonathan, she is sending out all the wrong signals, and given the 'titled' position she is in should know better. The Royals et all need a giant rocket up their jacksie's to boost their popularity!

[William Gilliland]

12:52 AM on 02/24/2012

In case you were not aware...Kate Middleton has married...she is now know as The Duchess of Cambridge! Stop with the Middleton!!!!

[ABXNOMORE]

08:41 AM on 02/25/2012

I'm pretty sure most of the world is aware of this. Give it a break.

[wynsar]

11:56 PM on 02/23/2012

Wonderful.....now if she can influence the next generations of Royals to repudiate fox hunting ....I applaud her

[AgainstAnimalAbuse]

08:59 PM on 02/23/2012

Good for Kate, Princess Di did not wear fur either.

[francesk]

07:39 PM on 02/23/2012

Perhaps fur will jazz her up a bit...what a dullard

[KateB21]

05:17 AM on 02/24/2012

Her "fans" are going to come after you with pitchforks now, I hope you know. Lol.

[David Daisy May Boldock]

09:52 AM on 02/24/2012

Pitchforks and shotguns after she has dispensed with the partridges..and i dont mean the pop group lol

[DinSea]

06:42 PM on 02/23/2012

Bull fights and killing for sport need to be 100% discontinued. period.

[mhh310351]

12:17 PM on 02/24/2012

would that include the A.L.F.?

[Spock]

05:58 PM on 02/23/2012

Pipa wears fur? That's a shame. Glad about Kate, though.

[liberalutopia]

05:27 PM on 02/23/2012

She better not start wearing fur or I will not like her anymore. People who wear fur are evil and wrong. Unless of course you live in an Arctic igloo and you eat the animals you wear, then, that is acceptable in my view. Jennifer Lopez, Beyonce, Rihanna, Gwyneth (yuck) Paltrow, and Kim Kardashian should be strongly taken to task for engaging in the cruelty that is buying and wearing fur. Even Paris Hilton has the decency to know that it is wrong!

[Kazzim Zongo]

07:30 PM on 02/23/2012

What if we convince them to eat the animals they wear and live in an igloo? Then it would be ok.

[liberalutopia]

07:46 PM on 02/23/2012

If they live in a truly arctic environment where people actually need fur to keep them warm and alive, I would have no problem with it. My problem with wearing fur is that it involves the torture and mutilation of innocent animals for the purpose of human vanity. I guess I was just raised to believe that that is wrong, but I don't know how you or others were raised. My family wasn't much into torture and such.

[wynsar]

11:57 PM on 02/23/2012

agree, agree, agree

[regulargal]

05:07 PM on 02/23/2012

I've never made an issue about it with anyone, but when I see a woman wearing real fur, I have an impression about her that she is maybe not very intelligent, that she is cold hearted, and that she is over compensating for something. They may be perfectly lovely women, but still, that's my impression. Not that they should give a rats behind about my impression.

[renoir]

07:47 PM on 02/23/2012

Cruella DeVille. Exactly.

[mhh310351]

01:29 PM on 02/24/2012

Some people have similar impressions of people of color, or northern Europeans, or ..... . How are you different?

[regulargal]

01:47 PM on 02/24/2012

Doesn't make sense. People don't ignore cruelty to wear a skin color.

[riverhouse]

04:42 PM on 02/23/2012

People are entitled to wear what they want. We all have our own preferences but we are not entitled to force other people to abide by those beliefs, whether it be wearing fur, eating meat, or using birth control or having an abortion. We should all just mind our own business.

[renoir]

07:53 PM on 02/23/2012

Nah. I disagree. Fur is not a necessity, it's a luxury. And fur garments are created by a huge industry where animals destined to live short miserable lives, crammed into cages and killed after not one moment, not one, of freedom or normal animal activities. If you have the courage to actually investigate how these animals are raised, you will find it to be abhorrent. Guaranteed. It's not a matter of rights or preferences. It's repulsive and unethical. But don't take my word for it. Step up and google "fur farms". Or "cosmetic industry animal testing". I double-dog-dare-you.

[wynsar]

11:58 PM on 02/23/2012

Are people entitled to kill another person because they feel like it?

[mhh310351]

01:43 PM on 02/24/2012

people = animals Don't tell me you equate the two?

This is not the same as someone with anti-social behavior kicking a puppy to death! This is people making a living doing something people have done since the beginning of our species.

[Highball]

04:20 PM on 02/23/2012

Well, I'm glad she isn't wearing fur. Catherine seems a little too classy to do such a thing. But then, I've been wrong before.

[czs5056]

02:30 PM on 02/23/2012

I thought peta was anti fake fur because it promotes fur like fashion

[renoir]

07:54 PM on 02/23/2012

They're not the thought police! They are just "People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals". Hence the name.

[czs5056]

09:58 PM on 02/23/2012

i prefer People Eat Tasty Animals

[Redhunteur]

05:11 AM on 02/24/2012

They are fundamental extremists.

[Cayla29S]

02:04 PM on 02/23/2012

Why would even PETA suggest that Catherine was wearing fur? There was nothing in that outfit that even looked like it was lined with real fur. In any case, these royals hunt animals for a hobby so is this ok but wearing fur is not? Ridiculous..

[patriciacaldwell]

02:28 PM on 02/23/2012

Another misleading headline. Reading the article might help you see that PETA was defending Catherine.

[Scipiosdream]

06:18 PM on 02/23/2012

I think that was Cayla's point: why are they defending her for not wearing fur while she supports hunting for leisure?