Kate Winslet says she was misled into posing on real fur

Kate Winslet lying face down on a couch on a real fur throw, her bare back and left butt cheek visible
Kate Winslet is one of the many movie stars who have made a very public and definite stand against fur. Winslet firmly refuses to wear fur and has now said she refused to use fur in a photo shoot but was misled into posing on a silver fox fur throw. In her recent Vanity Fair photo spread, the controversy started with Photoshopping rumors and has grown into a fur fight.

As a staunch anti-fur advocate, Kate Winslet has always been meticulously careful about what she wears – and what she poses with.

So when the Titanic star was asked to drape herself over a luxuriant fur rug for a provocative glossy magazine photoshoot, she was quick to seek reassurances that it was made from artificial fibres.

But now the magazine, Vanity Fair, has been forced to apologise after admitting that the actress had been misled and that the throw was really genuine fox fur.

While they were setting up the photoshoot in Los Angeles, Miss Winslet was told the fur was fake. But, in fact, she was posing on an £11,500 silver fox fur throw, flown 2,500 miles from the Boston store of Italian luxury bedlinen firm Frette.

[From Daily Mail]

In the particular shot, Kate was wearing nothing but thigh high stockings and stilettos and lying across the fur. She swears she wasn’t Photoshopped, but she definitely thought other things in the photo werent real. Both Winslet’s people and the Vanity Fair people have admitted there was a mix of real and faux fur on-set, but that’s where the agreement ends. While Vanity Fair has apologized, they say they thought Winslet knew the particular fur chosen for the shot was real. Kate’s people insist that she asked and was assured it was not.

Animal rights campaigners estimate that the throw used in the photoshoot required the pelts of at least six animals.

A spokesman for the People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals said: ‘We were surprised to see Kate in Vanity Fair posing with what looked like a real fur throw.

‘PETA has heard from countless celebrities that sneaky stylists at photoshoots can be rather coy when it comes to fur and whether it’s real or not.

‘So it seems Kate was duped – and with so many convincing fakes out there nowadays, it is easy to mistake real animal skins for the fakes. We’re pleased to be able to count Kate among the many celebrities, such as Eva Mendes, Charlize Theron, Pink and Sadie Frost, who would never wear real fur.’

[From The Daily Mail]

How does one not know real fur when their completely bare body is lying across it? If you can’t feel it with your hands, you could certainly feel it with the less weathered parts of the body. I’m willing to give Winslet the benefit of the doubt on the Photoshopping. She’s looked amazing for a few years now, and there are ways to pose a body to accentuate the positive and all but eliminate the negative. I like Kate Winslet, but I wouldn’t be appropriately cynical if I didn’t notice that she has gotten a massive amount of publicity out of one magazine photoshoot. At times the Photoshop controversy, subsequent indignance, then the fur mix-up story and resulting outrage, feel a little orchestrated. And with a movie opening in January, all the press couldn’t come at a better time.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

17 Responses to “Kate Winslet says she was misled into posing on real fur”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Margot says:

    I agree Ceilidh. I’ve touched extremely expensive fake furs, you can almost always feel the difference. I don’t really buy the fact she didn’t know.

  2. Rose says:

    Guess again, the new faux furs are unbelievable. I certainly can’t tell them apart and I own two vintage minks I inherited from my grandmother.

  3. embertine says:

    I agree, Rose, maybe if you spent all your time working with fur you would be able to tell a good fake from the real thing, but I certainly couldn’t.

    I also don’t believe the pics are photoshopped, because you can see the veins through the skin on her back and butt. Not that I’ve been studying it extensively or anything…. *ahem* 😉

  4. geronimo says:

    Well I disagree completely here. Kate doesn’t need controversy to drum up interest in her forthcoming films, and if she asked in advance that no real fur be used in the shoot, then she’s entitled to believe and trust VF will act professionally and honour that request. VF screwed up and Kate’s entitled to be pissed off here. She has every right to protect her image and her anti-fur stance.

  5. vdantev says:

    -oops misspelled my email 🙁

  6. vdantev says:

    The self-righteous jerks over at Deceiver are having field day over her fur faux pas.

  7. Lauri says:

    While I personally don’t have any problem with the use of fur, leather, etc. if she was lied to about something that has meaning for her…well, that’s inexcusable and the people who lied to her should have their professional reputations severely damaged.

    The only thing that really troubles me is the mention of PETA. I cannot respect that terrorist organization. I guess I’ll have to eat a steak today, even though I hadn’t intended to.

  8. Mairead says:

    What geronimo said. As for not noticing on the day – she was a bit distracted to be fair.

    And don’t tell us that the mighty vdantev is fallible? 😯

  9. Megan says:

    Why can’t Kate Winslet do a simple photo shoot without controversy? Maybe in future she should try and look more like herself in the photo. I still think she has been photoshopped.

  10. KDRockstar says:

    Oh, Vanity Fair. Didn’t they “dupe” Miley Cyrus, too? Not that I’m team ZOMG Smiley.

    Drama sells magazines. Period. Kate Winslet may not need the publicity, but with subscriber numbers down, the mags do.

  11. Kaiser says:

    I am making a choice to believe La Winslet, no matter what crap she tries to sell me. I just can’t get enough.

    Seriously, though, I believe her. 😀

  12. jess says:

    i would be SO PISSED. if i was in that situation. its like feeding a vegan something with animal fat in it and not telling them. urghh

  13. DemLaw says:

    I wish PETA didn’t make people want to go eat steaks. I’m an animal rights activist that does not agree with the way that PETA does things, mainly because it many times makes people go and do what they’re telling them not to. That doesn’t hurt you, me, or PETA – it hurts the cow, chicken, etc. on your plate or the fox on your back. I just don’t think animals should suffer to get back at an organization.

    That said, I respect those that eat meat as that’s your choice, but please don’t use PETA as a reason to do so. Whether we agree with the way they convey their message or not, I think we have to remember that what they’re fighting for is compassion and humanity for those that cannot voice their own sufferings; it’s about the animals, not the people.

  14. IMO says:

    I gave her the benefit of the doubt when she claimed she is agaist dieting and it was revealed she went to a doctor and then covered it up.

    Then I really wanted to believe her when she claimed she was against photoshopping.

    But seriously?
    She looks like a different person and either went through an extreme makeover and diet (and possibly some plastic surgeries) or extreme photoshopping.

    Now am I supposed to believe that fur statement?

    Why don’t she just be honest or not pretend to be so righteous or not even discuss those issues- like Angelina and Charlize.

    We all knoe all of them have plastic surgeries, diet and photoshop.

    • Jennifer says:

      Have you ever seen her without makeup? The woman is beautiful, but she has NOT had plastic surgery. As for going to a doctor for weight loss, I believe she was seeing a doctor AFTER the birth of her second child. She had put on a lot of weight with that pregnancy and as you get older, it is harder to lose weight. Her looks are a big part of what she does for a living, and if she HADN’T gone to a doctor and gotten her weight down, you would be sitting here calling her fat. So I suppose that no matter what she does, you’ll complain about it. If you knew anything about photography, especially portraiture, amazing things can be achieved with lighting, filters, focus, makeup and the right pose. You don’t need to photoshop an image to get the look in the Vanity Fair image of Kate. If you hire an accomplished photographer who knows what he or she is doing, you can achieve this without any Photoshop whatsoever. Unless you know her personally and you know everything she’s done or has not done, what right do you have to sit here and say she’s dishonest?

  15. They should apologize for the abuse of air brushing because that doesn’t look like her at all.

  16. kiran says:

    i think kate can do anything, she can use fur. she is innocent,eventhough she uses fur i support her.she is so hot,beautiful,she is godess of beauty. one thing diss appoints me is that why she uses artificial materials like fur, clothes. i wish to see kate nude in every photo.