Fresh out today (thanks again Anna):
Yes, as ever with the PETA lists, there are problems: companies that are’t there as they’re too small to be on the radar, companies that aren’t there because their products aren’t available (or only in a limited way, indirectly, online-only, etc…) in the USA, European companies especially.
But still: it’s useful. Especially when you see who’s off the list re. being in the Chinese market…
The other thing:
A couple of other things about LUSH first. Consider this something between a digression and setting the scene.
- I don’t own or buy any of their products, because I can’t use any. By which I mean: can’t use without a reaction occurring within 3 minutes of application: ranging from minor (for me, but scary for other people) immediate contact dermatitis—swelling, hives, rednes, rash, itching, hot to the touch—through to something deeply unhappy that looked like chemical burns.
- Also, their entire shop makes me sneeze. I’m by no means the most allergicky person in my family; but I can’t walk past, I have to cross the road as soon as I start getting LUSH-SMELL (similar but lower-grade for The Body Shop and Bath & Body Works). Shortness of breath and tightness of throat have been known in extreme cases. (Comic tale: I did once faint in a LUSH shop, from the fumes; a sweet SA tried to revive me in the old-fashioned way, with smelling-salts… in the forms of one of those bath-bombs. There was gagging. Poor sweet SA…)
- It would be great if they were to test their products out (on humans) to check for usability on sensitive skins. Yes, mine is freakishly sensitive, to the extent that some folks might consider it a “health problem”; but there’s lots of us sensitives out there; and my skin is pretty rough and tough compared to other sensitives I know. WE’RE HUMAN, WE HAVE SKINS, WE HAVE MONEY TO SPEND ON THEM, AND WE WANT PRODUCTS THAT WORK FOR US. (*ginger-pride fist-pump*)
- They’re not as all-natural as they’d like us all to think (but hey, that often means products have useful stuff in them).
On the other hand:
- BUT BUT BUT: they’re very ethical in many ways, and I would love to be able to use their stuff.
- See for example the (now global!!!) FIGHTING ANIMAL TESTING CAMPAIGN, in conjunction with Humane Society International
- And this, which stands out in exemplary fashion as what a fellow-blogger calls “Intentionally Cruelty-Free Beauty,” as contrasted with “Opportunistically Cruelty-Free Beauty“:
But then again, we have this:
Comments worth a read-through.
Three silly bint can’t count four comments here:
- it IS possible to be for animal rights AND human-animal rights too
- ditto animals AND women
- ditto women (or animals, or both) and having a sense of humour
- please be careful before misconstruing ALL OF FEMINISM and ALL FEMINISTS. Look before you leap(ing bunny). Read and think before opening mouth.
I say that as a person who is a feminist AND pro-animal rights. On an equal basis. Along with environmentalism, left-wingery, social justice. Yes, it IS possible to be more than one thing at the same time, and to juggle more than one thing at a time. No, that doesn’t make you 50% watered-down feminist + 50% animal rights supporter. You stay 100% of both. This isn’t a simple or simplistic either/or world. It’s a complicated multiple and/and/and/… one. Juggling all these elements is a precarious balancing act; sometimes it’s unstable; sometimes you topple.
BUT YOU CAN BE A FEMINIST AND AGAINST ANIMAL CRUELTY AT THE SAME TIME.