Thursday, 26 April 2012

Lush. Publicity stunt or making you think?

Reading quite a few blogs yesterday evening I came across a lot of posts about Lush Cosmetics and a "publicity stunt" which has OUTRAGED and SHOCKED (rolls eyes a little bit) people across the country, upon digging deeper (Daily Mail online-shudder) I found that Lush Cosmetics across the country are currently helping to spearhead a campaign  to end cosmetic testing on animals.

For ten hours on MondayJacqueline Traide was subjected to gruelling "tests" which included having her mouth clamped open, a strip of her hair shaved off, force-fed and generally tested upon in ways similar to how an animal would be for cosmetic testing. And all this happened in the window of a store on Regents Street, London.

Miss Traide volunteered for this, unlike the animals she had a choice.

Now plenty of people are saying that this was a step too far for Lush.

I didn't see it, so personally I don't feel I have the right to express moral outrage A'La Russell Brand.

People are saying that they wouldn't want their children to be exposed to this. Well in that respect, all I can say is, If you don't want your children to see it, take them away.
you have a right to choose what you want your child to see or not see. Use it. I know I would.

Did Lush Cosmetics go too far?

I can't tell you. I think that is for every individual to decide for themselves. We all have different opinions and different levels of what causes us to be morally outraged.

Has it raised peoples awareness and made people TALK about the testing of cosmetics on animals? It seems that it has.

Does this make it a BAD thing that Lush did?  Or does the end justify the means?

I'd love your opinion on this subject.

Let me know

Big Fashionista x x



  1. I think the choice of a female 'subject' presented 'nude' (bodystocking')with a male 'tester' and the composition of the performance is saturated with rape/abuse imagery.

    My problem isn't "won't somebody think o'the children" which I agree is reactionary. My problem is that the campaign equates animal testing with rape/sexual violence, and therefore equates women with animals.

  2. "My problem is that the campaign equates animal testing with rape/sexual violence, and therefore equates women with animals"

    This, this, a thousand times this. I'm all for ending animal testing. But I'm against the continuing objectification of women, and the glorying of "torture porn", which is, in effect, what Lush were doing.

    I applaud their stance, but not their methods - because people AREN'T actually talking about ending animal testing as a result of it, they're now talking about Lush, and violence against women.

    Please, won't *somebody* think of the animals? Lush, I'm looking at YOU.

    1. As I said on Twitter I hadn't even considered this viewpoint until now. Which is why I wanted to not give my opinion but hear others. Would it have had the same impact if it would have been a man? Or wouldn't have kept the campaign focused purely on the animals?

  3. I've talked about this fairly extensively all over the place BUT the thing I want to say about children is that of course, as one of those shouting "think of the children!", I would of course move my children from the area immediately. But it only takes a second to disturb a child. I saw an image in a paper left on the side when I was about 7 I think that didn't just give me nightmares, it stopped me sleeping. It disturbed me so much that 30 years later It still makes me uncomfortable to think about it. How long was I exposed to the image? seconds. I saw it, I closed the paper I freaked out.

    This isn't my main concern about the campaign to be honest, but it is something that I just wanted to point. I'm trying to think of a catching phrase along the lines of "a second on the lips a lifetime on the hips" to describe what I'm on about. Writing fail.

    1. Once seen never forgotten?

      Like my nan getting out of the bath that time. :-(

  4. I think this will have the opposite effect of what Lush wanted, it won't get people talking about animal testing, people will talk about the woman and why she decided to do this. You have to give her kudos for doing what she did, but it gives her as much publicity too!

    I agree with the comments about about the whole rape/abuse aspect of this campaign, it's sad that companies have to stoop to this gutter level, to try to 'raise awareness'

    For me, the only impact it has had is I'm voting with my purse and avoiding Lush completely!

  5. Animal testing has been banned in the whole of Europe since 2004. Lush need to do their publicity stunt in countries like China, or other countries who are still doing the animal testing practices, not here.

    Lush: why don't take your petition and shove it up your arse. I would have signed your petition but not anymore. Oh and you do the same with your products which stink in a 50 mile radius from your shops.

    HaiLing x

    1. ... There is no legislation whatsoever to stop companies in the EU from comissioning testing products/ingredients in other countries and including them in their products, nor from including ingredients that have been tested by individual companies in other countries in the products we buy every day, so I think it is perfectly relevant.

  6. While I can see where the above comments are coming from (My problem is that the campaign equates animal testing with rape/sexual violence, and therefore equates women with animals) I really don't think this was where Lush was coming from, by using the bodystockings in my mind these are trying to take the attention away from the fact it was a women. Also, which ever gender they used for each role, people would still have a problem with it. If they used two men, or two women or a man being tested on by a women people would still find fault. As for the children, yes I can see how some may find it traumatising but surely the next generation need to be educated to the harsh reality of life and what happens in this world.

  7. "but surely the next generation need to be educated to the harsh reality of life and what happens in this world".

    Yes. BUT only when and how a parent chooses not thrust upon them in the high street.

    Lush are irresponsible and thoughtless in doing this. It saddens me that people can do whatever the hell they like in the name of a good cause.

  8. Wow...I hadn't seen this until just now (sick kids, yadda yadda) but I didn't even see it as equating with rape/sexual violence until I read these, it has got me thinking...I'll process and be back, it has left me feeling uncomfortable...

  9. I think this stunt has worked out well.

    It shows their support for a good cause.

    If it raises awareness and the fact that they are against animal testing, then so be it.

    Good on them!


  10. as uncomfortable as the images made me feel, I can only assume that its no where near as terrible as the animals that get tested on feel on a daily basis.

    the whole 'rape/torture of women' didn't even occur to me until I read this post. In my opinion it had nothing to do with it.

    Animal testing must stop. End of.


  11. I tend to hate most advertising, which is what this was. Whether Lush say it was to raise awareness of animal testing or not, its a publicity stunt.

    If Lush truly wanted to raise awareness of animal testing then they could've done this without putting their name to it. But its all about Lush.

  12. Of course it's a publicity stunt, to raise awareness of their cause, and it seems to be working.I don't like the typical image of man against woman, and think it could have been better thought out in some ways.
    However my question is, if you did this in Tate Modern would it be classed as art?

  13. Personally I feel everyone has hugely over-reacted to the whole event and seems to have forgotten that the main cause of this campaign is for the good - what is it about us Brits that makes us need to pick holes in EVERYTHING? Campaigns against cosmetic animal testing are very close to my heart and I unquestioningly wholeheartedly support this type of campaign - no-one was hurt, this woman volunteered for the job, and I really don't think that the whole woman/man sexualisation/rape-connotations thing entered into the campaign.. Oh and don't forget that Lush actually campaign for human rights too so I think it's quite arrogant of us all to sit here on our computers and decide precisely what motivated Lush to do the campaign and what precisely is right and wrong about it - so many people are so focused on the 'ethics' of the stunt (what kind of society are we living in again...???) that many people don't give a second thought about criticising it and perhaps even forgetting the real matter of the cause - the animal testing issue. This woman volunteered for it, the animals do not and continue to suffer day in, day out, and to those arguing that testing in the EU is banned, OPEN YOUR EYES. Take a step into the real world and breathe in the shitty air. (P.S. sorry that this is very waffly I struggle to articulate what I'm trying to say) x

  14. I think Lush and the volunteer were very brave to do this; personally the concept that it smacks of sexual abuse never crossed my mind. What did cross my mind is the absolutely horrific suffering that animals are put through every day - not just one animal either, but THOUSANDS of them. And unlike the Lush volunteer, they don't get to go home at the end of the day - they get slaughtered. A life of nothing but misery. If people's feathers are ruffled by this then GOOD! It's about time people started to realised what animal testing really means.

  15. I think it has done what it was supposed to, make people feel uncomfortable. Whatever the reason, it has got people talking about the problem. I think it was a good campaign and people will always find problems with displays such as this, I'm not saying it wasn't extreme but something like this is never going to go down without people finding alternative representations to the one they were attempting to convey.

    A lot of the time people only feel uncomfortable because issues like this are ignored. It going from the back of peoples minds to right in front of their eyes. Good on lush and the woman for volunteering, I think it was about time someone did something shocking to remind people that this is still happening.

    Good post :) x

  16. That's why Angel investors are extremely sought after by entrepreneurs the costs of payday loan are often high-priced, as well as a lot with this can be pocketed through the credit provider.


Due to increased spam comments I am now having to moderate the comments I receive. I will do my best to get them approved quickly so please, carry on commenting as every time you comment a kitten smiles.

© Big Fashionista | All rights reserved.
Blogger Template Created by pipdig