Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Men's Clothing › Elephant leather shoes
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Elephant leather shoes - Page 11

post #151 of 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by DWFII View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by CDFS View Post

Does human life have value?


Of course it does.

Why do you ask this? You just quoted my post in which I emphasize the words "all life". Did you read my remarks or is this just a gambit for contention?

You made the dichotomy between all or none. If human life has value; then animal/elephant life must have value, in your eyes.
post #152 of 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by CDFS View Post

You made the dichotomy between all or none. If human life has value; then animal/elephant life must have value, in your eyes.

You got it in one. Animal life does have value. In the context of ethics or morality, none moreso than the other. If wearing calfskin shoes is acceptable, elephant shoes should be no less so.

I said that already...in the post you quoted.. Pretty clearly, I think.

I am perfectly willing to discuss this further if you wish but I would appreciate it if you would re-read my post and then think about it. I'm not suggesting you have to agree with me...just that you comprehend what is being said before you challenge it.
post #153 of 165
Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by DWFII View Post


Your profile doesn't say where you are located nor what you have access to, but truth to tell it's not as complicated as all that. I would use Lexol-ph or a ph balanced baby shampoo to wash the boots thoroughly. Use a soft brush and warm water. Work up a lather. Rinse. Let dry and recondition. Repeat if necessary.
Most saddle soaps are based either upon glucerine or tallow. They all will leave a residue.
Quote:
...which states it is designed to remove old silicon based products and prior buildup.
Maybe. I'm not familiar with it.
Quote:
Nappa Renovateur (which is said to be formulated for "delicate leather such as napa, boxcalf, and veal?",does NOT use mink oil, and specifically says "leaves no residue")?  You did not mention mink oil among the glycerine or tallow comments above - is mink oil a "sticky film" substance such as you caution against?   Or does mink oil qualify as a "heavy oil?" 
Whatever you use...rub some of it on your skin...just like hand cream. When it has had time to be absorbed, your hands will either end up dry, oily, or sticky. The same thing will happen to your leather. If the product leaves an oily or sticky residue on the leather, the leather will pick yup dirt and hold it close.
Quote:
When it comes to the wax, we'd be talking something like this, right?
I would tend towards a solid wax if only because it can be applied thinly and can be brushed off. Creams are somewhat redundant because they contain conditioners. You've already conditioned the leather if you followed my advice. All you need now is a wax to protect and shine.
Creams will get deep into the texturing of the elephant, carrying dirt and solvents (like turpentine), build up, and be hard to removed
Quote:
Although I'm not sure, because this has beeswax and carnuba wax, bonded by turpentine.  Perhaps this would qualify as sticky.
Maybe. The beeswax concerns me more than the carnuba. The carnuba will dry hard. All solvents are detrimental to one degree or the other. As they evaporate they pull conditioners out of the leather. If you have recently reconditioned the leather, this will probably not be significant. But benzene and turpentine, etc., are not compounds that are benign to any leather.
Quote:
Now HERE I'm thinking that quill ostrich would be a good candidate for something like the Nappa Renovateur, since the leather is delicate and that formula is very anti-residue, etc. 
Ostrich is not the same problem. It has a smooth grain surface. You can use creams and Renovateur and wipe the excess off. More than that there is no fissuring for dirt to accumulate in.
Quote:
ALSO, I'm thinking where ostrich LEG skin is used, that the properties of that material actually DO resemble reptile in their scaly, dried out appearance.  My instinct would be to treat these with Reptan Milk.  Would that sound reasonable to you?
Probably can't hurt, but again...it's leather. It will respond like any leather. Any light conditioner will be absorbed...certainly better than any heavy conditioner.
I suspect that there isn't much to be gained by overthinking this. Certain products are going to have formulations that may contain chemicals that offer a very slight additional penetration or compound to nourish the leather but it's not as if simpler, less expensive products such as Lexol contain no conditioners at all. And some more expensive products, in their zeal to "improve" a product or impress a customer, introduce compounds that in certain circumstances might be harmful. such as mink oil, or petro-chemicals, or tallows.

 

 

Thank you very much, DWFII.  Oh, and I live in Austin, Texas.

 

Your post was very helpful and excellent.  Really made a difference.

 

@Damiance:  I would love to post a picture, but I'm working on a ship offshore at the moment.  Probably why I have so much time to overthink leather conditioning :)  I'll get a pic posted soon when I get home.

 

ccm

 

 

post #154 of 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by DWFII View Post

You got it in one. Animal life does have value. In the context of ethics or morality, none moreso than the other. If wearing calfskin shoes is acceptable, elephant shoes should be no less so.

I said that already...in the post you quoted.. Pretty clearly, I think.

I am perfectly willing to discuss this further if you wish but I would appreciate it if you would re-read my post and then think about it. I'm not suggesting you have to agree with me...just that you comprehend what is being said before you challenge it.

I re-read your post and my point still stands. Assuming that you don't make shoes using leather made of human skin specifically killed for that cause as well as their meat products, you, yourself don't hold ALL life in equal regard. Most people make a divide between creatures they kill and things they don't kill. Most of the time that division is by another line than the line between the creatures they'll eat when already dead. I thought your post lacked nuance. Such a lack sets me off, for some reason.
post #155 of 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by CDFS View Post


I re-read your post and my point still stands. Assuming that you don't make shoes using leather made of human skin specifically killed for that cause as well as their meat products, you, yourself don't hold ALL life in equal regard. Most people make a divide between creatures they kill and things they don't kill. Most of the time that division is by another line than the line between the creatures they'll eat when already dead. I thought your post lacked nuance. Such a lack sets me off, for some reason.


Edit: I started to reply to this, and then realized the fuel I would be throwing on this ridiculous line of discussion, which leads to no practical consideration of leather goods.

 

ccm

post #156 of 165
With a little more time this morning than the other, I would like to clarify one critical point...when I say we don't have the moral authority to choose winners and losers, I am not saying that we don't have the practical ability to choose winners and losers. Obviously we do.

But to assert that the life of a cow...or even a cockroach...is somehow intrinsically less valuable than the life of an elephant is either astonishingly arrogant or distressingly self-serving.

As human beings we naturally favour our own species above all others. I think a convincing case can be made that this is a matter of genetic imprinting and survival alone and on that level has nothing to do with morality...if only because we invented morality. "Morality" is a construct.

In that context it is ludicrous to suggest that not using human skin equates to not valuing all life equally. Of course I value human life above elephants and seals and cockroaches. It disingenuous to suggest that any of us do otherwise...or should do otherwise. But it is not matter of morality, it is a matter of self-preservation.

I will not engage in any prolonged debate about whether using animal products is "right" or "wrong." I have made my living with leather for over 40 years. That said, I will observe that as biological creatures we are dependent upon biological resources for survival. We can wish it were otherwise but "wishing isn't fishing"--it doesn't feed the family.

The bottom line is that the objections to elephant leather...or eating meat, or wearing wool...is always couched in some sort of morality. Always portrayed as somehow unethical or reprehensible. And all that is fine...as long as you can walk the walk and not just talk the talk. (I also believe that no one is ethically entitled to eat meat until they have personally killed, butchered and prepared their own steak.)

No matter how high-toned and elevated, our best ethical standards are imposed upon the universe. Not vice-versa. Ask the cow if it feels its life is less valuable than the elephant's.

Any morality that is/can be tailored to individual likes and dislikes or modified in pursuit of a desired outcome is self-serving.

No matter how it is rationalized picking the slices of pepperoni off a pizza doesn't absolve a person of eating meat...the juices and essence of both the meat and the animal are in the sauce whether you can see it or not. Might as well just close your eyes (and many do) and savour the sausage.

I suspect that's what's going on here--it is all too easy to close your eyes to the fact that the elephant has no more right to life...and every bit as much...than the newborn calf.

If you will wear calf skin shoes without qualm, it smacks of hypocrisy to condemn those who wear elephant shoes...or even the harvesting of elephant.

As I said, before...every argument that can rationally and legitimately be made against using elephant leather can also be made about using calfskin.
post #157 of 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by DWFII View Post

With a little more time this morning than the other, I would like to clarify one critical point...when I say we don't have the moral authority to choose winners and losers, I am not saying that we don't have the practical ability to choose winners and losers. Obviously we do.

But to assert that the life of a cow...or even a cockroach...is somehow intrinsically less valuable than the life of an elephant is either astonishingly arrogant or distressingly self-serving.

As human beings we naturally favour our own species above all others. I think a convincing case can be made that this is a matter of genetic imprinting and survival alone and on that level has nothing to do with morality...if only because we invented morality. "Morality" is a construct.

In that context it is ludicrous to suggest that not using human skin equates to not valuing all life equally. Of course I value human life above elephants and seals and cockroaches. It disingenuous to suggest that any of us do otherwise...or should do otherwise. But it is not matter of morality, it is a matter of self-preservation.

I will not engage in any prolonged debate about whether using animal products is "right" or "wrong." I have made my living with leather for over 40 years. That said, I will observe that as biological creatures we are dependent upon biological resources for survival. We can wish it were otherwise but "wishing isn't fishing"--it doesn't feed the family.

The bottom line is that the objections to elephant leather...or eating meat, or wearing wool...is always couched in some sort of morality. Always portrayed as somehow unethical or reprehensible. And all that is fine...as long as you can walk the walk and not just talk the talk. (I also believe that no one is ethically entitled to eat meat until they have personally killed, butchered and prepared their own steak.)

No matter how high-toned and elevated, our best ethical standards are imposed upon the universe. Not vice-versa. Ask the cow if it feels its life is less valuable than the elephant's.

Any morality that is/can be tailored to individual likes and dislikes or modified in pursuit of a desired outcome is self-serving.

No matter how it is rationalized picking the slices of pepperoni off a pizza doesn't absolve a person of eating meat...the juices and essence of both the meat and the animal are in the sauce whether you can see it or not. Might as well just close your eyes (and many do) and savour the sausage.

I suspect that's what's going on here--it is all too easy to close your eyes to the fact that the elephant has no more right to life...and every bit as much...than the newborn calf.

If you will wear calf skin shoes without qualm, it smacks of hypocrisy to condemn those who wear elephant shoes...or even the harvesting of elephant.

As I said, before...every argument that can rationally and legitimately be made against using elephant leather can also be made about using calfskin.

Scarcity, breedability.

Anyway, if you can't see that 'all life' includes human life and your dog's life we lack a certain common ground.

By the way, I've never killed and butchered a steak, but have in the past (accidentally) swallowed flies and swatted at mosquitos. I presume, since all life is equally valuable I am ethically entitled to eat steak.

One other thing, you seem to mistake me for someone who's morally opposed to using elephant products. I'm not, as I said I was set off by your absolutism.
post #158 of 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by CDFS View Post

Scarcity, breedability.
Anyway, if you can't see that 'all life' includes human life and your dog's life we lack a certain common ground.
By the way, I've never killed and butchered a steak, but have in the past (accidentally) swallowed flies and swatted at mosquitos. I presume, since all life is equally valuable I am ethically entitled to eat steak.
One other thing, you seem to mistake me for someone who's morally opposed to using elephant products. I'm not, as I said I was set off by your absolutism.

You mistake me for someone who is "nuanced." I am not.

And no, you're not ethically entitled to eat steak. Not until you've killed and and watched life fade from the eyes of your meal. Not until you've taken responsibility for that. At least once in your life. Not until you know in your gut that meat doesn't come from plasticine wrapped trays.

Not in my book.

That's my opinion. How you deal with being confronted with a real ethical quandary is your lookout. Note that I'm not telling you to quit.
post #159 of 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by gladhands View Post

Aside from human skin, I can't think of a single leather that would make me less comfortable than elephant.

I hate elephant leather. I have seen it everywhere and I hate it. I thought y'all needed to know that....sorry I was not very nuanced about this opinion.
post #160 of 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by DWFII View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by CDFS View Post

Scarcity, breedability.
Anyway, if you can't see that 'all life' includes human life and your dog's life we lack a certain common ground.
By the way, I've never killed and butchered a steak, but have in the past (accidentally) swallowed flies and swatted at mosquitos. I presume, since all life is equally valuable I am ethically entitled to eat steak.
One other thing, you seem to mistake me for someone who's morally opposed to using elephant products. I'm not, as I said I was set off by your absolutism.

You mistake me for someone who is "nuanced." I am not.

And no, you're not ethically entitled to eat steak. Not until you've killed and and watched life fade from the eyes of your meal. Not until you've taken responsibility for that. At least once in your life. Not until you know in your gut that meat doesn't come from plasticine wrapped trays.

Not in my book.

That's my opinion. How you deal with being confronted with a real ethical quandary is your lookout. Note that I'm not telling you to quit.

I don't think you get what you've written sofar. As I said, I've killed and eaten (rightaway) many a fly, mosquito and perhaps bigger prey, like butterflies, for instance. You say all life is equally valuable. Since I've killed one animal I should be ethically entitled to eat all animals, following the strict guidelines laid out by you. Unless, of course, you say one should kill one of every species one eats. If that is the case one should kill hundreds of animals in one's lifetime. I've just remembered to have gathered and cooked cockles a couple of times. Is it now OK to eat just cockles or ALL shelfish? I could imagine one could get away with making sub-divisions in the animal kingdom.

PS
I hope to keep myself out of this discussion for the rest of this thread.
post #161 of 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by CDFS View Post

I don't think you get what you've written sofar. As I said, I've killed and eaten (rightaway) many a fly, mosquito and perhaps bigger prey, like butterflies, for instance. You say all life is equally valuable. Since I've killed one animal I should be ethically entitled to eat all animals, following the strict guidelines laid out by you. Unless, of course, you say one should kill one of every species one eats. If that is the case one should kill hundreds of animals in one's lifetime. I've just remembered to have gathered and cooked cockles a couple of times. Is it now OK to eat just cockles or ALL shelfish? I could imagine one could get away with making sub-divisions in the animal kingdom.
PS
I hope to keep myself out of this discussion for the rest of this thread.

Sorry...I know quite well what I written. Right from the beginning I realized that you were "inventing" and conflating all sorts of issues that didn't bear upon what was said or intended. That's the danger of "nuance." It's code for self-exonerating rationalization. For ignoring or shifting the burden of responsibility.

Indeed, you entirely misconstrue what this thread is about...ie.,first, elephant leather and peripherally, the ethics of using it. Ethics. Not the specious malarkey being touted about human skin or whether inadvertently swallowing a fly is in any way equivalent to understanding (through intimate and personal participation) the impact your existence has on the creatures around you. Letting others do your dirty work is arrogance...or moral cowardice...in my "un-nuanced" opinion.

It comes as no surprise that my "un-nuanced" approach to matters that I consider to be quite serious and that I feel connected to, offends the more "nuanced" individual. In my experience, "nuance" is a euphemism for "weasel words." A hastily constructed defense mechanism to protect an ill-considered point of view. A synonym for the vapours that arise from the "unexamined life."

PS...And in that context, I suspect it's worth noting that for clear minded individuals who actually really do want to discontinue a conversation, just saying "no" is the logical course of action.
post #162 of 165
Apology accepted.
post #163 of 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by CDFS View Post

I hope to keep myself out of this discussion for the rest of this thread.

Considering the crap that you have expounded in your last posts that would be a great idea.
post #164 of 165
...
Edited by DWFII - 11/2/11 at 7:13pm
post #165 of 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by meister View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by CDFS View Post

I hope to keep myself out of this discussion for the rest of this thread.

Considering the crap that you have expounded in your last posts that would be a great idea.

There was crap flung around in dollops, but not by me. (Now this is a different discussion)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Men's Clothing
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Men's Clothing › Elephant leather shoes