Leather Jacket: The Rebel Icon That Lost Its Gall

July 30, 2009

by Joshua Katcher

james_dean

Since the first Harley Davidson Motorcycle Jacket appeared in the United States in 1919, there might not be a symbol that resonates more clearly in almost every subculture than the leather jacket. From rock stars, punks, bikers, to hipsters, fashionistas, greasers, goths, metal-heads, and even the not-so-subcultured like military aviators and the police – the leather jacket has largely defined ‘cool’ since the word cool was made to mean something new by jazz legend, Lester Young, in 1933.  In addition, many fashion experts regard leather as having unsurpassed sex-appeal – so much that it has one of the most https://i0.wp.com/www.boston.com/bostonglobe/ideas/brainiac/ramones.jpgpopular fetish followings. Originally made for its functionality of durability and protective properties, it has come to suggest masculinity, and strength – and more recently as high-end designers cash in our desires to look cool and strong, wealth.

Sid Vicious’ suicide note instructed: “Bury me in my leather jacket…” Images of James Dean, Elvis, Marlon Brando, The Ramones, The Sex Pistols, Michael Jackson, The Fonz, Cathy Gale, Indiana Jones, and even the Black Panthers and the Russian Bolsheviks come to mind when we think of leather jackets.  Hollywood helped launch the leather jacket as a symbol of intimidation and rebelliousness early on with Jimmy Stewart and John Wayne in Leather Bomber Jackets, and films like The Wild One, Easy Rider, Grease and Mad Max .

What is a leather jacket? Well, to be simple, it’s the preserved skin-organ of an animal, torn from its body, treated with chemicals, dyed, and cut up into pieces to be used as a “fabric”.  Like all flesh, without the toxic tanning process, leather would rot and decompose. Horses, goats, cows, calves, lamb, sheep, pigs and “exotic” animals like crocodiles, ostrich, and many kinds of snakes are all used for their skins. Other species are hunted and killed specifically for their skins, including zebras, bison, water buffaloes, boars, kangaroos, elephants, eels, sharks, dolphins, seals, walruses, frogs, turtles, and lizards. Dairy cows are also turned into leather once they are “spent” and their calves become expensive calfskin once slaughtered for veal. According to the Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations (FAO), the global leather industry slaughters more that a billion animals and tans their skins each year, globally.

tannery pollution in Bangladesh

The tanning is especially problematic. If a billion animals are killed for their skins per year, you do the math on how many gallons of toxic chemicals are used to turn that into leather jackets. Communities surrounding tanneries in India, Kentucky, and Sweden report high instances of leukemia and cancer, and the chemicals used to tan leather, including heavy metals like chromium, find their way into water supplies and river systems. Animals on factory farms in the U.S. produce 130 times as much excrement as the entire human population, without the benefit of waste treatment plants. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has even acknowledged that livestock pollution is the greatest threat to our waterways. Turning skin into leather also requires mineral salts, formaldehyde, coal-tar derivatives, and various oils, dyes, and finishes, some of them cyanide-based.

Eco-friendly leather is a myth and a travesty. Based simply on the amount of resources it takes to raise animals – from feed crops, pastureland, water, and fossil fuels, to the record-breaking amounts of greenhouse gasses emitted by cattle (livestock production is the #1 cause of greenouse gas emissions), even if, at the very final stage of this environmentally devastating process, a “vegetable-based” tanning process is used, it does not erase the colossal leather boot-print that raising livestock has on ecosystems . What also becomes clear is the myth that synthetics are environmentally inferior to so-called “natural” materials like leather.

Many people see leather as by-product of the meat and dairy industry, and justify wearing it with the rationalization “ The animal is dead already, so we may as well make use of the skin”. But would the animal be dead if there weren’t a demand for it’s flesh and skin in the first place? According to the USDA,  the skin of the animal represents “the most economically important byproduct of the meat packing industry.” So it isn’t just someone making use of scraps – it is a profitable industry in itself.

https://i2.wp.com/upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/1b/Cow_slaughter.jpg

It’s clear that the leather jacket is a force to be reckoned with, but as our relationships to animals and ecosystems evolve, what does the leather jacket really mean, now? It all boils down to power – like Keanu Reeves in the Matrix, the leather trench represents his potentially intimidating and powerful appearance. Much like the meaning of fur, which has come to represent arrogant indifference towards animals, leather is headed down that same path, towards being a symbol of ignorance and indifference.

“The image of leather no longer defines outcasts, rebels, and counter-culture; instead, it is the epitome of mainstream, problematic relationships with ecosystems and violent and exploitative relationships with animals.”

The gorgeous illusions spun by the Goliath fashion industry are, indeed, spellbinding. And it’s no wonder the leather industry, with its orthodox relationship to the oldest, largest and most powerful https://i2.wp.com/www.truelegends.com/images/pce15.jpgfashion houses, has seen such consistent success. We hear writers, journalists and experts avow the nature of leather – how this “material” molds to our shape, breathes, and can withstand extreme punishment. But, it is not a “material” per se (any more than the Jewish hair used to stuff mattresses and pillows from the Nazi death-camps was a “material”). It was someone’s very skin. How can anyone be taken seriously as a compassionate, conscientious, and ecologically responsible individual, while boasting such a powerful symbol of both ecological devastation and animal suffering?

We know better. This isn’t a leap of faith – the evidence is right there in front of us. Not only are there countless documented cases of animals being boiled and dismembered alive, but in India, one of the largest leather exporters, the cows have their tails broken and chili-peppers rubbed in their eyes to keep them moving on their exhaustive journey outside the boarders of India where they can legally be killed specifically for their skins. Snakes and lizards may be skinned alive because of the belief that live flaying makes leather more supple. Kangaroos are slaughtered by the millions every year; their skins are considered prime material for soccer shoes. The conditions and treatment these animals face are horrifying.

Losing its gall. The image of leather no longer defines outcasts, rebels, and counter-culture; instead, it is the epitome of mainstream, problematic realtionships with ecosystems and violent and exploitative relationships with animals. It is woefully ordinary, and painfully tired. When you wear leather, you are no longer saying “I am powerful, individual, and cool“, you are saying “I am environmentally irresponsible and I hate animals“.


Car Sick

March 5, 2009

“If a group of aliens came to this planet and said they would bring us all sorts of goodies like jet skis, tomatoes in January, computers, and so on (or at least they would bring them to the richest of us), on the multiple conditions that we offer up to them a yearly sacrifice of a half-million human lives, change our planet’s climate, individually spend increasing amounts of time serving them, and socially devote an ever-increasing amount of land and other resources to their service, we would rebel in a flash. Or at least I hope we would.” – Jan Lundberg, Anti-Road activist making analogy to car culture, Alliance for a Paving Moratorium

https://i0.wp.com/www.hardrivesinc.com/UserFiles/Image/HWY35%20-%201.jpg

https://i2.wp.com/ilovemountains.org/images/FAQimages/blasting.jpg

The EPA is considering reversing a Bush Administration decision that has prevented many states from taking action to reduce global warming from cars. You can sign the petition HERE, and then consider the issue even further. Some say that the most destructive aspect of cars is destroying mountains to  access metals to build the car itself. Sorry hybrid lovers – sorry electric idealists – sorry LA! According to WorldCarFree.net, A car causes more pollution before it’s ever driven than in its entire lifetime of driving. The EPA now estimates that mountaintop removal will double over the next decade, destroying forests, river systems, animals, and anything else that may be in the way.

When you combine that with ever-increasing road-building, which requires 250,000 tons of sand and gravel per mile, in addition to millions of annual deaths, and tens of millions of annual injuries caused by car accidents, we can’t help but wonder if arranging your life to do most things locally isn’t the best option? Maybe those locavores are on to something? Anyone else wanna give up their cubicle to work from home?

I could even go into the energy required to build certain bike frames (and how no matter how far you ride it, you could never compensate for the energy used to make the alloys) but I’ll save that for another day. Get out your walking shoes… hmm..wonder what those are made out of and how much the person was paid who glued on the sole and stiched the seams?


BAMBOOZLED: ‘Spinning’ Eco Threads

March 12, 2008
Bamboo

I was shocked to discover that Bamboo Rayon is not an eco-friendly fabric! Thanks to Mark Morris of Turk & Taylor, who recently exchanged Emails with me regarding certain processes by which plants like bamboo are turned into soft threads, I was directed to this article which discusses in depth, the toxic chemicals and hazardous conditions surrounding a seemingly benign industry.

Greenwashing

The major distinction here is between a rayon and a linen. Rayons are typically made using large amounts of hazardous chemicals like bleach, carbon disulfide, and sodium hydroxide (AKA: lye, caustic soda), known for a sleuth of environmental and health hazards, in a process called hydrolysis alkalization. Aside from the shock of finding out that something being touted as almost beneficial to the Earth and those of us living on it, I feel betrayed by those reaping the benefits of this perfect example of greenwashing.bambooBamboo yarn

It’s no surprise since the EPA has been a huge failure, and on top of that, even their limited scope cannot touch most of the “Free Trade” protected environmental catastrophes otherwise-known-as textile factories in other countries with little environmental regulations.

There are two typical ways in which bamboo is turned into fabric. One of them is considered sustainable – utilizing enzymes, one of them is not. Of course, the cheaper way is the dangerous one:

Bamboo the plant is wonderfully sustainable; bamboo the fabric isn’t so easy to categorize. There are two ways to process bamboo to make the plant into a fabric: mechanically or chemically. The mechanical way is by crushing the woody parts of the bamboo plant and then use natural enzymes to break the bamboo walls into a mushy mass so that the natural fibers can be mechanically combed out and spun into yarn. This is essentially the same eco-friendly manufacturing process used to produce linen fabric from flax or hemp. Bamboo fabric made from this process is sometimes called bamboo linen. Very little bamboo linen is manufactured for clothing because it is more labor intensive and costly.”

In a market already overwhemled with specialized labeling, how can we know that the things we buy are actually eco-friendly and sustainable, and not just some ridiculous ploy?

Oeko-Tex Standards“If you are thinking of purchasing bamboo clothing or any clothing that has been made outside the U.S., look for certification from an independent and reliable certification company such as Oeko-Tex, Soil Association, SKAL, KRAV or similar organic or sustainable certification body. Currently, the Oeko-Tex label is the most comprehensive label for insuring that the garment is healthy for consumers but it does not certify the manufacturing processes that produced the garment as being environmentally friendly and sustainable.”

DB’s Etiquette Recommendation: I am no chemist, so I’d love to hear your thoughts on this. Please drop a comment with any tips or advice.