feuds

PETA Takes a Whack at Sharon Stone's Fur

by celebuzz on Jul. 3, 2008 01:30 PM / 4 Comments

Looks like PETA has stepped off of the Olsen twins' nuts long enough to turn its righteous rage toward Sharon Stone.

The organization's president, Ingrid Newkirk, poison-penned a letter to the 50-year-old actress Tuesday, offering to pay for a brain scan to determine the cause of "the indifference that you flaunt and the callous remarks that you make about the suffering and death of the animals whose fur you wear so often."

The letter, which was obtained by tmz.com, goes on to ask, "Would you allow PETA to pay for a scan of the prefrontal region of your brain to determine if comments and actions that seem to demonstrate a lack of empathy are the result of a physical defect?"

You're probably barking up the wrong tree, Ingrid.

Stone's clearly not afraid of pissing off a billion Chinese—do you think she's worried about the wrath of a few bunny-huggers?

Most important, the more Sharon stays covered up, the better. If a few critters are sacrificed for the cause, so be it.

Quotables /

“Animal Rights activists PETA have offered to pay for a brain scan for Sharon Stone, so the root of her "insensitivity" can be discovered. In a letter written by PETA's president Ingrid Newkirk, the free medical procedure has been offered mainly because of Stone's choice comment about the recent devastating earthquake in China, being caused by "karma" for the country's involvement in Tibet.

I don't know why PETA bother wasting their money. Not only did this woman attribute the death of thousands of people (including thousands of children) to "karma", but she also chose to be the starring role in both "Sliver" and "Basic Instinct 2: Risk Addiction". The candle that occupies the space between Stone's ears burned out a long time ago...”

Splash News Online

“Yesterday Sharon Stone issued a second apology after her remarks last week when she wondered aloud if the earthquake in China that has left almost 90,000 dead or missing may have been karma because the Chinese government is mean to the Dali Lama. This new apology is in stark contrast to an interview she did with the New York Times just 4 days ago. In that interview, she discussed her getting dumped by Dior for their ad campaigns in China. The Times said...

Early last week, Ms. Stone said, she received a call from Sidney Toledano, the chief executive of Dior, which hired the actress for beauty advertisements in 2005. “I talked to Sidney and I said: ‘Let’s get serious here. You guys know me very well. I’m not going to apologize. I’m certainly not going to apologize for something that isn’t real and true — not for face creams.’ ”

Stone was upset because Dior issued an apology in her name which she says does not reflect her beliefs.

Ms. Stone said that she told Mr. Toledano of Dior that since she didn’t believe she had done anything wrong, why didn’t Dior let her clarify her remarks with a statement? Yet the apology released in Ms. Stone’s name by Dior’s office in Shanghai bears little resemblance to (Stones original statement) and the difference seemed to irritate the star.

To many bloggers, the apology made Ms. Stone seem at once groveling and insincere — another actress doing what she has to save a movie career. "It makes it appear that I’m in agreement that I did a bad thing,” Ms. Stone said.

So is this bitch sorry she said 90,000 Chinese people had it coming when karma dropped a building on them or not? It doesn’t seem like she is. It also doesn’t seem like I can go wrong in snug fit jeans. Sorry ladies, I’m taken!”

Tell Us / Was PETA's letter too harsh?

Next Story / Will Smith: Better Living Through Rutting

Also In Feuds /

Comments / 1-4 of 4

Sort Oldest First

flirtyfabulous 1 yr 4 mos ago
Reply

PETA needs to chill out.
mynameisearl 1 yr 4 mos ago
Reply

Sharon is whack.
lance 1 yr 3 mos ago
Reply

If the women wants to wear fur it is her choice to do so. just as it is PETA's
right to choose not to. I sincerly do not belive she is into nor indorsing any person nor group that does testing on or torturs animals. Besides if it was not for animals giving up there hides to us our for fathers never would have been able to have survied. Not to mention that most of the other products used other than fur are made from potrolium products. Atleast with fur it isn't draining the worlds natural reasources.
francesca 1 yr 3 mos ago
Reply

I believe any person can wear what they want, it is their choice. What did people do hundreds of years ago. they killed for the meat to feed their family and used the hide to wear to keep warm. What about these people who wear their precious snake skin boots and belts, or their rabbit fur coats. Not only can use eat the meat but wear it as well. Their are so many animals that people kill to eat, so why not use every part of the animal and not let is go to waste. I commend Sharon for being herself and being a REAL person and speaking her mind. We need more people like her, she is only saying and doing what the rest of us are thinking and would like to do. Before you know it their will be a group of people who will start crap about vetables... you have to pull them out of the ground and chop them up to eat them as well....