Related to the Mukluk-along.
We've been discussing possible substitutions for the trim yarn. The original pattern calls for a wonderful but very $$$ faux-fur, Plymouth Foxy.
Delana and I have been blogging merrily about finding an appropriate fur, and buying a fur cuff to sew on instead of the Foxy.
I read a reader comment, from mm, who said "Gotta do it without the fur though". Got me thinking. I tend to use the term "fur" to mean any fabric or textile or whatever with hair hanging off it -- animal-based or no. I wonder if people understand my usage that way?
I won't buy or wear "real" fur. And I won't knit with the stuff.
Politics aside, we simply don't need to.
The "fake" furs -- i.e. non-animal-sourced -- are so wonderful that there is no reason to use or wear anything else. The colours, textures and effects are amazing. And the stuff is warm.
But more to the point, there's a lot of them around, these non-animal furs. It seems to me that popular usage might well be changing... the term "fur" doesn't necessarily imply anything about the source of the material these days.
Certainly, I didn't mean I was going to trim these felted mukluks with real animal hair. I wouldn't dream of it.
Perhaps we should call it "phur" for clarity.