Best alternative to wool is..?

Haven't replied to this in a while, I need a while to think about this whole thing and also because I felt attacked (not saying I was) so I felt I needed to let myself calm down before I responded.To Panterra:I never said that I knew anything wool, but I also wasn't talking about fiber art, which I also know nothing about. My point was basically that as I am vegan, I will not use any animal product unless I know the animal was not and will not be harmed in the end. I do not know these companies you speak of, and I do not know you, so I do not know if I can take your word for it.To NaturalWomyn:I did not know cotton was such a dirty crop, but it is good info to know. Cotton was already on my "disliked" products item because it seemed like it stole the spot from hemp, which seemed like a much easier crop to handle and use in different things.
updated by @jon2: 07/25/15 02:50:55AM

Just because someone sets you straight shouldn't make you feel attacked...and the term "fiber arts" refers to the use of any kind of yarn to create anything...as in clothing, pictures, bags, etc. (in other words, any article created with yarn). You shouldn't assume that just because an animal is utilized in something that the animal is mistreated. I am not asking you to take my word..I have no reason to mislead you. If you choose to walk around in a world where you spout unfounded info so you can feel ethical and caring, then go ahead. Sheep are healtier when they are sheered and that is a fact...not my opinion. Before I responed to you I checked my facts...I even consulted with a farmer friend of mine who happens to be a vegan herself and she confirmed my information. So...whatever...stick your head in the sand and feel "attacked".
Jon said:

Haven't replied to this in a while, I need a while to think about this whole thing and also because I felt attacked (not saying I was) so I felt I needed to let myself calm down before I responded.

To Panterra:
I never said that I knew anything wool, but I also wasn't talking about fiber art, which I also know nothing about. My point was basically that as I am vegan, I will not use any animal product unless I know the animal was not and will not be harmed in the end. I do not know these companies you speak of, and I do not know you, so I do not know if I can take your word for it.

To NaturalWomyn:
I did not know cotton was such a dirty crop, but it is good info to know. Cotton was already on my "disliked" products item because it seemed like it stole the spot from hemp, which seemed like a much easier crop to handle and use in different things.

Panterra Caraway said:

Just because someone sets you straight shouldn't make you feel attacked...and the term "fiber arts" refers to the use of any kind of yarn to create anything...as in clothing, pictures, bags, etc. (in other words, any article created with yarn). You shouldn't assume that just because an animal is utilized in something that the animal is mistreated. I am not asking you to take my word..I have no reason to mislead you. If you choose to walk around in a world where you spout unfounded info so you can feel ethical and caring, then go ahead. Sheep are healtier when they are sheered and that is a fact...not my opinion. Before I responed to you I checked my facts...I even consulted with a farmer friend of mine who happens to be a vegan herself and she confirmed my information. So...whatever...stick your head in the sand and feel "attacked".
Jon said:

Haven't replied to this in a while, I need a while to think about this whole thing and also because I felt attacked (not saying I was) so I felt I needed to let myself calm down before I responded.

To Panterra:
I never said that I knew anything wool, but I also wasn't talking about fiber art, which I also know nothing about. My point was basically that as I am vegan, I will not use any animal product unless I know the animal was not and will not be harmed in the end. I do not know these companies you speak of, and I do not know you, so I do not know if I can take your word for it.

To NaturalWomyn:
I did not know cotton was such a dirty crop, but it is good info to know. Cotton was already on my "disliked" products item because it seemed like it stole the spot from hemp, which seemed like a much easier crop to handle and use in different things.

I think you just come off a little strong when you're trying to correct someone. I did a mistake by thinking that yarn wool and articles of clothing made of wool were the same, I believe that any city person can make that mistake. I was also not generalizing the the entire thing, I do not believe that everyone mistreats their sheep, but I know there are people that mistreat their animals.

I was not bashing the people that do what you are speaking of, but people that mistreat their animals in the process, and I'm apologize to anyone who thought I was.Edit: Just wanted to add that this is text after all, so it is hard to get a grasp on how you are trying to put this info. I just felt like I was being attacked for something I believed from what I had seen. As I stated, I don't know about yarn other than what it looks like. I assumed that since so many people exploit animals for so many products, that there would be some companies who would do the same for wool yarn. I guess I should have remembered the saying "Assuming just makes an ass out of yourself."

heythere is no need to feel attacked here on this site, everybody is just so nice. just coz someone is giving a different opinion than urs is no reason to feel attacked n u shld b open to different views. heres another one - i m not trying to attack or opposing ur views (in fact i do have respect for such considerate philosophies) - i just honestly want to know y we feel harming plants is ok where as harming animals is bad when all of us r living things?

Thank you! And I totally agree
sourabh thakur said:

hey
there is no need to feel attacked here on this site, everybody is just so nice. just coz someone is giving a different opinion than urs is no reason to feel attacked n u shld b open to different views. heres another one - i m not trying to attack or opposing ur views (in fact i do have respect for such considerate philosophies) - i just honestly want to know y we feel harming plants is ok where as harming animals is bad when all of us r living things?

Pantera, I feel that you did come off a bit strong as if you were trying to insult his ways of living. I definitely understand where jon is coming from on this. It's funny that you insulted Jon because you thought he was generalizing and assuming that all animals are mistreated, but aren't you doing the same thing by assuming all wool manufacturers do not mistreat? Just because you have met someone or a few people that don't does not mean all of them don't. There is more to this than just abuse of animals as well. Jon might not want to support the univited incarceration of sheep for the production of wool. Not all farms allow their sheep/cows etc. to roam freely on the prairie as packaging and propaganda always tries to lead you to believe. Actually, the majority of farms now a days trap their animals in small cages or stalls for most of the duration of their lives. Even if the animals are allowed to roam freely on grasslands it still is drastically different than what millions of years of evolution has prepared this amazing creature to do. Now that we are not hunter/gatherer societies and we have the knowledge and ability to eat a wide variety of foods, we have the option to not eat or use animal products to ensure a peaceful life for all. I am a vegetarian but I do realize that animals were and sometimes can be a necessary for survival. There is no way humans could survive without the gift of meat from animals. But now things are much different. to respond to sourabh, I have had that question asked of me before as it is a pretty good one. If we decide to not eat animals, why does our thinking not extend to cover plants as well? Plants and animals are much different. Animals are much more highly evolved and complex organisms. Plants in the food chain are usually at the very bottom, they are the producers. These plants utilize abiotic ingredients and manufacture their own food which becomes food for almost all animals and humans. You cannot survive without plants. You can survive without animals. A lot of plants are killed to feed us but we need not to kill and jail organisms with emotions. I still really respect the sacrifice the plants make for me to nourish my body. When I am out in the forest collecting edible plants for salads and flours I like to thank each plant for what they have made. I always leave some for wildlife and for the plant to reseed. Even though I am a vegetarian, I agree more with hunting than raising animals on farms. I have never done it, but it is a very primal thing and something that is necessary for life. goodness, sorry i typed so much i just kinda got on a roll. hope this clears some things up though =]

Thank you for your comment Tyler, you kind of nailed it in the head with what I think of it all.I also agree more with hunting rather than raising an animal in a cage to eat. It is a more natural approach, the animal has been living it's natural life and has a chance to flee. We need certain animal nutrients that I do not know a lot about, but I believe that the majority, if not all that we need, is available from other sources or synthetically, so that we do not NEED to kill and eat the animal anymore.To Sourabh:I believe plants are something that can be much easily farm produced. Animals release methane which has a high global warming potential. I cannot remember where I read or heard this, but I believe if we took the grain that is being fed to farm animals, it could go much further to helping starving people (If the sentence didn't make sense, basically the animals eat a LOT of grain that could go to feeding hungry people.)In general, I feel that I should not contribute to the animal suffering if I have the choice.

Jon said:

Thank you for your comment Tyler, you kind of nailed it in the head with what I think of it all.

I also agree more with hunting rather than raising an animal in a cage to eat. It is a more natural approach, the animal has been living it's natural life and has a chance to flee. We need certain animal nutrients that I do not know a lot about, but I believe that the majority, if not all that we need, is available from other sources or synthetically, so that we do not NEED to kill and eat the animal anymore.

To Sourabh:
I believe plants are something that can be much easily farm produced. Animals release methane which has a high global warming potential. I cannot remember where I read or heard this, but I believe if we took the grain that is being fed to farm animals, it could go much further to helping starving people (If the sentence didn't make sense, basically the animals eat a LOT of grain that could go to feeding hungry people.)

In general, I feel that I should not contribute to the animal suffering if I have the choice.

Your welcome man =]. i was reading around on this forum and I came across this thread and I had to create a membership so I could write something. And you are exactly right. I think the stat is....that we feed cattle 8 times more grain than they produce. Therefore by eating lower on the food chain you are consuming a LOT less food than when you eat meat. This, however is mostly due to the ridiculous factory farming procedures that are used today. There was some other stat that said 70% of all corn in america goes to feeding cows. Cows are not suppose to eat corn, but we give it to them - genetically modified corn too (double whammy). That is the reason there are so many out breaks of e coli. If you feed cattle grass for a week it sheds 90% of the e coli in its gut.

Sheep and cows and a lot of other animals that are raised for food or other reasons were "manufactured" by humans over years of selective breading the same goes with most of the plants we eat. These things exist because of us.If a cow is not milked that has been bred to produce milk it will "suffer", if a sheep is not sheered it will "suffer" because it has been bred for that reason. I am not saying that it is alright to mistreat animals we raise but saying that - "Even if the animals are allowed to roam freely on grasslands it still is drastically different than what millions of years of evolution has prepared this amazing creature to do" is a little inaccurate.

Suffering is an all other topic... animals that are not aware of their existence do they really suffer?

BTW I do think that there are a lot of good reason to being vegetarian or vegan.

JD..I like the points you brought up. My friend the farmer told me, that sheep who are allowed to roam freely in this day and age die from lack of sheering because they develop parasitic bugs in their wool and if they develop over growth of coat they not only die from heat but from the moisture that collects over time and causes the animal to become weighed down and unable to walk. You brought up valid points because although it may be cruel to cage an animal or put them into an "unnaturel" enviroment...after years of animal breeding...what is naturel to said animal may not be naturel any longer. People talk about freeing animals in zoos all the time, but those animals would certainly die in the wild because it is foreign to them. As I stated before concerning sheep...the wool industry is not a by product of the meat industry. People don't raise sheep intending to kill them for food and then say, "Wow, let's sell the wool and make a bonus!" I truly believe that you can be compelling on eithier side of this argument...but I will conclude with this...I think that anyone can assume and anyone can jump on a soap box and preach about not hurting animals or the environment and that all sounds real good. But the facts are that no one lives a completely compassionate life that does no harm. And people will tend to point fingers but at the same time do other things just as bad that they will seek to justify.
Jdwood said:

Sheep and cows and a lot of other animals that are raised for food or other reasons were "manufactured" by humans over years of selective breading the same goes with most of the plants we eat. These things exist because of us.If a cow is not milked that has been bred to produce milk it will "suffer", if a sheep is not sheered it will "suffer" because it has been bred for that reason. I am not saying that it is alright to mistreat animals we raise but saying that - "Even if the animals are allowed to roam freely on grasslands it still is drastically different than what millions of years of evolution has prepared this amazing creature to do" is a little inaccurate.

Suffering is an all other topic... animals that are not aware of their existence do they really suffer?

BTW I do think that there are a lot of good reason to being vegetarian or vegan.