Boycotting other countries

I see often from animal activists say that we need to boycott certain countries because of cruelty or they kill certain nonhuman animals. One question needs to be asked to those people who ask for boycotting these countries where do you live, on some planet which doesn’t use other animals, or do you live on this planet.  If you want to be consistent with boycotting because of cruelty or killing of nonhuman animals, you cannot live on this planet due to the fact that use of nonhuman animals is ubiquitous and all use involves abuse. And is there a country where animal products aren’t used, no. These boycotts imply that some nonhuman animals value more than others, but all animals are equal.

It’s called for boycott of China due to killings of dogs and cats etc.; Japan for killing of whales and dolphins. So using/killing of dogs, cats, whales and dolphins isn’t ok, but it’s ok to use/kill other nonhuman animals. You aren’t being consistent if you think that all animal are equal but you call for boycott of those countries for those reasons. How can non-vegans be against use of cats, dogs etc. but have nothing against use of other nonhuman animals? That’s breathtaking inconsistency.

Some say I think all use of other animals is wrong but I support those boycotts. Those campaigns don’t say that all use is wrong; they imply that particular use is wrong. Why don’t promote what you think. And it doesn’t matter what you personally think about use of other animals. What does matter is what general public sees when you advocate for those campaigns.  And people are doing those campaigns instead of veganism education. Why? Maybe because people cannot handle the truth of inherent immorality of all use of nonhuman animals, right. No, they can handle the truth. Doing unequivocal vegan advocacy helps all animals.

Fur

Why there are animal activists who tend to lie about animal products which people wear by presenting fur as an only one which requires suffering and death. And they advocate for inconsistent and sexist campaigns like I'd rather go naked than wear fur. Would Rosa Parks have said I'd rather go naked than sit in the rear side of the bus. No, she wouldn’t. I asked myself why animal activists are doing those campaigns. And I haven’t come to any good explanation of those campaigns.

Why you are vegan, if you talk mostly about fur. Is leather, wool and silk good. Then why you don’t wear them. I assume that you don’t wear them or think it’s acceptable to do that. You choice not to tell people reasons why you don’t wear them. What that will accomplish. It creates confusion amongst general public. They will think that we shouldn’t use nonhuman animals only for fur. But you have a solution for that, right. You assume that they cannot think for themselves and they need baby steps. I wonder what you would do after they accept that we shouldn’t use other animals for fur. What's your plan? Would you tell them I lied to you before, I think that all use of nonhuman animals is immoral; I thought you had an IQ of the rock and needed to be feed little teaspoons of the truth. Why you don’t respect the people and present them with all the facts about animal products to a person a let them decide for themselves.

And what’s about name calling, only directed towards women. I am not saying that name calling towards man would be ok. But why only women. And why only when they wear fur. One supermodel had to explain why she wore fur. I found out that she wears leather, wool and silk. Why she was criticized for wearing only fur, but not for wearing other animal products.