They’d rather go naked than wear fake fur.

Flying in the face of a progressive push to outlaw the lavish fashion staple, fur fanatics are raising hell over the City Council’s proposed ban — and some say it’s all in the name of sustainability.

“I would never wear fake fur,” said Chelsea Broughton, 26, a self-employed social media specialist who owns a fur-lined parka, a rabbit-fur coat and fur slide-on sandals.

“That’s worse for the environment. I don’t use plastic straws. I recycle. I care deeply about the environment, and fake fur is made of plastic.”

Broughton and fellow millennial Michelle Donnelly, 33, claim it’s a myth their generation hates fur — and they’re the example.

“Not only do I wear fur, but I also wear Uggs [shearling-lined boots], and I have bags that are leather,” said Donnelly, who works in logistics for the film industry and happily wears a $1,695 fox fur-lined parka, which her husband purchased for her from Midtown’s ER Furs for Mother’s Day two years ago.

“Also, from the beginning of time when people needed to wear something, they wore fur to keep warm,” she said. “It’s not like this is something that is new, and I want to torture an animal just because.”

Marc Kaufman, of his eponymously-named store on 30th Street in the heart of the city’s fur hub, said he’s been “bombarded” by customers fearful he’ll shutter his business if the ban bill introduced by Council Speaker Corey Johnson last month becomes law.

The bill would not ban used fur. Another bill, in the state Assembly, would ban new fur sales throughout the state.

“I must have had at least 60 phone calls. People are angry,” he said. “This is about taking a person’s rights away. It’s really gone too far.”

Anti-fur messages have bled into the mainstream through campaigns such as PETA’s celebrity-backed “I’d rather go naked than wear fur,” and several cities, including Los Angeles and San Francisco, have banned fur sales.

Major fashion labels, including Versace, Gucci and Diane von Furstenberg, have also ditched the controversial duds — fueled by a millennial push against pricey pelts.

But a backlash seems to be brewing.

“That’s almost like taking away my freedom of speech. It’s taking away my freedom of luxury,” said film producer Calvin Bacote, 52, who owns two mink and two chinchilla coats he bought from Kaufman.

“I should have the right to live free, be free and enjoy what I work hard for.”

For fur-wearer Amy Johnson, 70, the issue is less about fashion and more about freedom.

“I feel like we are starting to live in communist China. Everybody who becomes elected immediately becomes a dictator,” she said, declining to discuss her fur stock, because “that’s irrelevant.”

“My disagreement is with the process of taking people’s rights,” she said. “As Americans, we have a right to wear fur. [Millennials] are a little blind to their freedoms that are being taken away. It’s a slippery slope.”