If you think it would be helpful, I could rank all those examples in order of outrage, beginning with boiling my favorite pet. I am not completely comfortable with any of them, but some bother me more than others.

In each case, I would ask how big is the harm and how big is the benefit.

Answers won't be easy, but I will probably count leather shoes as more beneficial than fur fashion accessories. I would probably count the benefit of providing food as greater than providing entertainment for a hunter. I would prefer that a hunter kill and eat an animal rather than simply killing it.

To measure the harms, I would want to know how much the animal is capable of suffering, how long and acutely it suffers, and whether it would have existed and suffered at all if it were not created to serve someone's purpose. To be honest, I will be more sympathetic to cuter and gentler animals rather than, say, sharks.

I think most people around here are opposed to needless, pointless suffering. There is some diversity of opinion over how big the benefit has to be to justify animal suffering. And I suspect that there is some intentional ignorance over what goes on with industrial food production to avoid difficult questions. I maintain some ignorance myself, it's not pleasant material to see or think about.