Rihanna’s certainly a fashion risk-taker, but did her recent shaggy ensemble cross the line? PETA certainly thinks so.
The animal rights organization is known for its constant fashion protests, but this one is unique in that it’s over feathers. At the August 19 launch of her Reb'l Fleur perfume, the singer donned a bright teal Antonio Berardi top, decorated with lush ostrich feathers, which has since been heavily criticized: PETA claims Rihanna “exploited” the birds for her “dubious looks,” since feathers are often "ripped off" live birds, resulting in "gaping" wounds."
The kicker comes when the controversial group questions how a famous victim of domestic violence could support live plucking.
“We keep hoping that Rihanna, a victim of violence herself, will learn to open her heart and start empathizing with the suffering of others. That includes the animals who are beaten, gassed, electrocuted and poisoned to be turned into fashion accessories."
In 2010, Rihanna promised to go fur-free after PETA named her one of the most egregious fur wearers. In response, PETA said they would be “keeping an eagle eye on what she wears.”
(Looks like someone’s keeping their promise.)
What do you think? Should Rihanna refrain from wearing feathers? Is it equivalent to wearing fur?
Related content: Does this controversial fashion spread glamorize domestic abuse?
Will 'divorce rings' catch on?