i152 / CC

Our beloved Stella McCartney is rightly outraged over the misuse of one of her designs. It seems a sheer black bra from Stella's lingerie collection was used—without Stella's permission, of course—in an ad for a fur boutique.

Stella—who is totally dedicated to her anti-fur and -leather stance—only found out about the ad when she saw it in the latest issue of Vogue. There it was: one of her designs—partially covered by a ghastly mink coat and accessorized with a ghastly leather belt. Stella had lent the bra to a stylist for use in an editorial photo shoot, but the stylist had a mix up and used it for the advertisement instead—without asking for Stella's permission.

The story is that when Stella saw the ad, she "hit the roof and said that she planned to sue." Good for her! Stella doesn't want to support the cruelty of the fur industry. (Heck, I wouldn't like it if my second-grade finger-paintings were used to promote those animal killers.)

As for the fur boutique, they have already issued a "grovelling apology" and will not be using the ad again—which is quite a blow for them, considering that the ad would've cost £10,000 (about $19,000) to shoot in the first place—and about $50,000 to place in Vogue! That's a lot of money for a boutique to lose, even for one that regularly peddles $10,000 animal skins.

It's nice that the boutique has apologized to Stella. I don't suppose there's any chance that they'll next apologize to the countless animals who are caged, electrocuted, and skinned alive in the name of "fashion" … ?

Posted by Amanda Schinke

mediabistro / CC

Ordinarily, fall is literally the biggest time of year for fashion magazines. But this fall, the season has a more … shall we say … literal meaning—as in, it looks like Anna Wintour is tumblin' down. Or at least her ad pages are! Yes, it seems that these tough economic times have hit even the fashion industry.

The September issue of Vogue will no doubt be full of the usual "fashions" and more animal skins than the Queen of Mean can count on her two grubby hands. But what will not be in the issue, at least not in the U.S. edition of Vogue, is the usual hefty number of advertisements.

According to this story, last year's Vogue had 50 more advertisement pages than the 2008 edition will have. Translation: dollar signs are not in season.

Earlier this year, we even offered financial help to Aretha Franklin so that she could keep her house—granted she hand over the furs. And now we’re trying to help bail Anna out. If she would like to accept one of our advertisements to help her fill those empty pages, we’re here. Perhaps our beautiful Eva Mendes ad? Or, maybe our racy Joanna Krupa ad or even our sexy Imogen Bailey ad! How about a little memorial of Anna Nicole Smith?

In the past, our ads have not been welcome at Vogue. Anna is far too friendly with the fur industry which anally electrocutes animals and bodies wrapped in fur skinned off the backs of fully conscious animals to accept them, but perhaps the downturn in the economy will mark the upswing of the moral code at Vogue?

Posted by Jennifer Cierlitsky

It is no surprise that every year, both deserving and not-so-deserving souls pop up on the Queen of England's honors list. In some quarters, certain OBEs are known as "other b****'s efforts," while others are simply regarded as sales awards, as is the case for much disliked Vogue editor Anna Wintour. Given Wintour's reputation as a pelt pusher with a habit of accepting free furs, her new OBE has quickly been dubbed "other beings' efforts."

Wintour will receive further recognition from PETA for her tireless work promoting an industry in which foxes, minks, and chinchillas are confined for months to crowded, filthy cages before being suffocated, gassed, or genitally electrocuted. We are sending Wintour a certificate entitling her to a brain scan to identify the arrested development of her mirror neuron, the part of the cerebral cortex that allows a person to experience empathy—or not.

Posted by Ingrid E. Newkirk