Browsing Tag

ethical living

Ethical, Life

Living healthily & ethically should not be a privilege

August 9, 2017

Fresh cherries on a fruit stand at Granville Island, Vancouver
Since the start of 2017, I have been making a conscious effort to live more consciously and ethically. The two biggest things I have discovered since then are; 1) it feels overwhelming a.f, 2) it’s expensive. The first one is understandable but the second is not ok.

If you live in a modern country, you can walk into any town or city and find pretty much anything you want or need. Try doing that when you’re trying to only buy ethical, cruelty free, animal product free, and horrible chemical free products. It is hard. Luckily, my town has a Holland & Barrett, so at least I don’t have to buy my toothpaste online. I couldn’t even find a wooden toothbrush in any physical stores in my town. You can buy plastic toothbrushes in every shape and colour imaginable, but you want an eco-friendly alternative? Sorry, no chance.

Isn’t it ridiculous that it’s so hard to find highstreet stores that pay their workers fair wages and don’t damage the environment?

Some supermarkets in my area sell some Ecover and Method products (environmentally friendly cleaning), they sell soil association approved organic fruit, and handmade soap in zero waste packaging. But, they are more expensive than their commercial or non-organic counterparts.

There are good reasons for that, though:

  • Companies are not just using cheap chemicals or materials, they’re using more expensive, organic ingredients.
  • These products might take more man hours.
  • People are being paid fairly.

Those are all huge positives, until it comes down to the customers wallet. You can want to support all the ethical companies in the world but being able to do it isn’t always possible. Not everyone can justify an extra quid or two on every ethical item they buy, because that quickly adds up and eats away at your budget.

Surprisingly, shopping more ethically for clothing was the easiest part for me. Ethical clothing is vastly more expensive than highstreet garments and that truly demonstrates the problem with fast fashion. You don’t have to actually buy from ethical clothing companies to shop more ethically because there are plenty of second hand options available if you give yourself time to plan and search for what you need. But you can’t do that with your food shop, cosmetics or hygiene products.

This doesn’t just come down to me, or you, wanting to make an ethical choice, it’s also about our health. Organic, pesticide free fruit and vegetables are more expensive than non-organic produce. As I’ve already said, that’s because of the time and skill needed but being able to provide a healthy diet for our families should not be a privilege.

I’m not really sure what the solution is, but I do know that living ethically, healthily, and consciously should be available for everyone regardless of their budget.

The world has changed a lot since our grandparents were kids. While the technological age makes us more connected globally, I think it has made us disconnected locally; life seems to run at a faster pace and less thought is given to our communities and environment. In an ideal world, we could adopt a slower lifestyle, learn to make some of our own clothes, make our own cleaning products, and only buy from local farmers and growers. Unfortunately, that’s not possible for the majority of people.

I’m fairly certain that the solution to this problem is a huge overhaul in society but how likely is that? When your own government have to be forced by courts to do something about pollution problems in the capital city and publish a half assed, weak response that passes the responsibility, how does that kind of change happen? The public can have their say all they want but if the government don’t care then nothing will change. We need to encourage the people in power to make a change because it is unlikely to happen otherwise.

Maybe I am being unnecessarily pessimistic, but when you hear that climate change isn’t in your prime ministers top list of things to focus on, it’s easy to be disheartened. What does it matter if you or I change our habits if the government don’t care (about a lot of things concering most people)?

What on earth have we done to get to the point where living ethically, fairly, and healthily is a privilege?

Save

Beauty, Ethical, Ethical and sustainable living

NARS, quit pretending to be appalled by animal testing & supporting it anyway

June 29, 2017

Rabbit

Although it seems to have blown up all over social media, you may have missed the news that NARS have decided to sell in China, where the government requires cosmetics to be tested on animals.

This is a huge backstep for a company loved by many people looking for higher end cruelty free products.

While the news itself was enough to anger a lot of customers, the way they dealt with the backlash is easily one of the worst PR responses I’ve seen. I’ve embedded their full response from Instagram below, but here’s the TL;DR: we hear you’re angry about us testing on animals, but we don’t give a flying fudge because we want more dollar.

 

 

We want you to know that we hear you. The global elimination of animal testing needs to happen. We firmly believe that product and ingredient safety can be proven by non-animal methods, but we must comply with the local laws of the markets in which we operate, including in China. We have decided to make NARS available in China because we feel it is important to bring our vision of beauty and artistry to fans in the region. NARS does not test on animals or ask others to do so on our behalf, except where required by law. NARS is committed and actively working to advance alternative testing methods. We are proud to support the Institute for In Vitro Sciences (IIVS), a globally recognized organization at the forefront of advancing non-animal methods in China and around the world. NARS is hopeful that together, we can work toward a cruelty-free world. For more on the good work IIVS is doing, see: http://bit.ly/2rVjnwV

A post shared by @narsissist on

Needless to say, the comment section on this post is alive with incredibly angry, previously loyal, customers who are accusing the company of selling out, which is exactly what they are doing. This is a company trying to weasel their way out of a bad decision. Sure, it’s great that you are supporting alternatives to animal testing, but what’s the point if you’re then going to carry out animal testing? The only way to stop governments demanding animal testing is to not comply with their demands and keep your products out of their market. You’re not going to encourage them to change their mind by doing what they want.

You don’t get to be outraged by animal testing and then support it anyway; it’s like bombing for peace. 

At this point, it seems fairly clear that NARS are not listening to their customers and are going to go ahead and sell in China. That being said, if you were previously a NARS fan, it might be worth emailing the company to let them know how unhappy you are and that you’re voting with your feet and taking your business elsewhere. If you’re interested in doing that, Cruelty Free Kitty has a great guide on what to say. I’ve given it a go, so let’s see what happens.

NARS are far from the only company who have decided to expand into the Chinese market, losing their cruelty free status. They are also far from the only company who claim not to like animal testing, who “support” alternatives, but test on animals anyway. Here are a handful of examples; you will find similar statements on pretty much every cosmetics company who tests on animals.

  • Estee Lauder are “committed to the elimination of animal testing”, but test where required by law. Amazing commitment there.
  • L’Oreal’s animal testing section on their website makes for a brilliant read: “L’OrΓ©al does not test any its products or any of its ingredients on animals. Nevertheless, because our products are sold in China, L’OrΓ©al still figures on the PETA list. In China, the health authorities still require and carry out animal testing for certain products.”
  • MAC, who were previously cruelty free, “do not test on animals” but will do if a regulatory body demands it…
  • Revlon’s statement is very confusing, as they claim they have not tested on animals since 1989 but then say “There are, however, a limited number of countries that have not yet adopted these alternative scientific methods. While Revlon complies with the requirements for safety in all of these countries”.

The wording of some companies policies is not always very clear, so the best way to make sure you’re supporting a cruelty free company is check the Leaping Bunny website.

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save