The state of Britney Spears' undress - or, rather, lack thereof -
would not normally be of concern for PETA.
However, ever since the poptress clothed herself in an albino python
while gyrating in front of a caged tiger at last year's MTV Video Music
Awards, the relationship between the two has made for intriguing
As PETA sunk its teeth into Spears, she relented, and dropped animal
acts from her show. Seeming to seal her fate as PETA's pet, she then
last month signed on to appear in PETA's "I'd Rather Go Naked Than Wear
Fur" poster campaign.
However, while Spears agreed to follow in the well-pedicured footsteps
of Naomi Campbell, Cindy Crawford, and Pamela Anderson, she insisted on
Somehow, news of Britney's participation was leaked to the New York
Post's Page Six, which ran the story with the headline "Britney Strips
For Fur-Fighters." A media firestorm ensued, as outlet after outlet ran
with the racy story, most attributing the facts to the Post story.
Spears was reportedly livid when the story broke, so angered at being
"exploited" by the animal activists that she dropped out of the
campaign, generating even more coverage.
"Contrary to what has been widely reported, Britney Spears was never
going to appear in a PETA poster undressed," her spokesperson
Post reporter Chris Wilson defended his original article, insisting that
rather than him saying she'd be naked, "I said 'peel down,' or 'bare her
bod.' And when do you ever not see a picture of Britney where she's at
least showing her navel?"
Fair point. Shame we'll never get to see just how pro- or anti-fur she
really is, though ...