It's seems like recently a stream of companies (netflix, facebook, now UD) are intent on making horrible decisions. It's like they're begging to lose their customer base!
After reading some of the comments posted on UD's fb page (ouch), perhaps they will go the netflix route and rescind their decision.
As far as I know it is needed by law that products used on humans need to be tested on animals first or something similar..
Yes this is right ... Mac has also done this not sure everyone knows that .
I just think its a bad move on UD's part since They built their company on cruelty free products.
They are taking steps in china to stop animal testing, and UD said in their press release they are working towards that goal, but I think it woulda been better fr them to go to china once that was in place ...makes no sense to me . It's a PR nightmare for them you should see some of the comments on their Facebook page.
They will lose a lot of customers, then again, selling in China, they will probably gain tons more and maybe not even notice a difference in profit or profit may surprisingly go up.
Right about now though, I'm sure their PR departments are in up to their heads with the backlash of the announcement.
To be honest I was more concerned with their human rights violations than their necessity for animal testing. However Urban Decay has long championed animal welfare even allowing the people who work in their HQ offices to bring their pets with them to work.
How easily "ethical" companies overlook these kinds of things when theres a multi billion dollar industry they are missing out on.
Someone has just told me that MAC have done the same? I know so many people who buy MAC purely because of its "cruelty free" stance. Same with Urban Decay. I cant believe companies with those kind of original beliefs could sell out so badly.
UK_Makeup_Artist wrote: Someone has just told me that MAC have done the same? I know so many people who buy MAC purely because of its "cruelty free" stance. Same with Urban Decay. I cant believe companies with those kind of original beliefs could sell out so badly.
It's always an interesting exercise to see how flexible a moral stance can become once it is committeeafied, incorporated and focused grouped into a warm and fuzzy justification that can be turned into a press release.
I'm not vegan and have no "dog in this fight", but I am a jaded cynic who is fascinated by self-justification gobbledygook.
this is funny. I love the spin they put on this.... we are getting into China to change the way they do business, but of course we have to bring our business there first... LOL! This was written by someone that thinks we're stupid.
I don't have a dog in this fight.... I know that everything that needs to be animal tested is animal tested ... if not you would be signing a very long waiver with every purchase agreeing not to sue the company if it blinds you, causes cancer, etc.
so much of what we buy here (cosmetics) is already made in China. Maybe they they test before sold to the Chinese people but I don't think they test the stuff they sell to us. How do they afford animal testing when they sell a shadow palettes to us for around $1.00 each? I'm curious.
A lot of popular makeup brands that you think are made in Europe, Canada and the USA are actually made in China...nobody stamps that or announces it but I'll bet you have expensive popular products in your kits that were made in China. This is a dirty industry secret that few people will admit to.... Companies all over the world buy in China, have their label put on the product and sell it under some fancy name.
I really don't get that China has higher standards in cosmetic safety then the USA? that seems odd to me, I had no idea. I know France and the UK have higher safety standards but I had no idea China did... Isn't it China that lets stuff through with higher lead content then we allow in the USA? This whole thing makes zero sense to me. Clearly I'm missing something
Lots of cosmetic companies sell in China and have been doing so for many years. Is Urban Decay doing something different or worse than all these others? Do those of you who won't buy UD any longer also not use any of these?
L'Oréal (which owns and makes Artec, Biotherm, Cacheral, Carson, Helena Rubinstein, Lancôme, Lanvin, La Roche-Posay, L’Oréal, L’Oréal Paris, L’Oréal Professionnel, L’Oréal Perfection, L’Oréal Kids, Kérastase, Redken, Inné, Laboratoires Garnier, Giorgio Armani, Harley Davidson, Matrix, Maybelline, Jade, Gemey Paris, Jean-Louis David, Dop, Cadonet, Jacques Dessange, Ralph Lauren, Redken, Soft Sheen Carson and Vichy)
LVMH (which owns and makes Christian Dior, Guerlain, Benefit, Make Up Forever, and many others)
Shiseido
Procter & Gamble (which owns and makes Olay, Vidal Sassoon, Pantene, Cover Girl, Max Factor, and many others)
Estée Lauder (which owns and makes Clinique, Prescriptives, Aramis, Origins, M.A.C., La Mer, Bobbi Brown, Tommy Hilfiger, Donna Karan, Aveda, Jo Malone, Kate Spade, Bumble+Bumble, Darphin and many others)
on a side note...Just pointing out that by putting gas in your car you support countries that kill women for having premarital sex....even if it's rape..... women are treated much worse then lab animals in some of these countries.... and yet we fill up our cars with no remorse...why it that?
Mary wrote: this is funny. I love the spin they put on this.... we are getting into China to change the way they do business, but of course we have to bring our business there first... LOL! This was written by someone that thinks we're stupid.
I don't have a dog in this fight.... I know that everything that needs to be animal tested is animal tested ... if not you would be signing a very long waiver with every purchase agreeing not to sue the company if it blinds you, causes cancer, etc.
so much of what we buy here (cosmetics) is already made in China. Maybe they they test before sold to the Chinese people but I don't think they test the stuff they sell to us. How do they afford animal testing when they sell a shadow palettes to us for around $1.00 each? I'm curious.
A lot of popular makeup brands that you think are made in Europe, Canada and the USA are actually made in China...nobody stamps that or announces it but I'll bet you have expensive popular products in your kits that were made in China. This is a dirty industry secret that few people will admit to.... Companies all over the world buy in China, have their label put on the product and sell it under some fancy name.
I really don't get that China has higher standards in cosmetic safety then the USA? that seems odd to me, I had no idea. I know France and the UK have higher safety standards but I had no idea China did... Isn't it China that lets stuff through with higher lead content then we allow in the USA? This whole thing makes zero sense to me. Clearly I'm missing something
I'm with you Mary also don't have a dog in this fight ...I just thought it was funny and their press release is a laugh. I do get their standards either, high lead contents in everything.
Rawan91
Posts: 13
Liverpool, England, United Kingdom
for some reason, i wasn't surprised really ...
they want to make profit .. its greedy dirty industry ..
i was actually liking Urban decay for their moto and image .. but always wondered how long would that last ..
Rawan91
Posts: 13
Liverpool, England, United Kingdom
Mary wrote: on a side note...Just pointing out that by putting gas in your car you support countries that kill women for having premarital sex....even if it's rape..... women are treated much worse then lab animals in some of these countries.... and yet we fill up our cars with no remorse...why it that?
for many reasons which would take pages & pages to explain.. i don't think this does apply ..
i'm not sure whether i did get it right or wrong .. but i feel its some sort of a stereotype ..
It bothers me about Urban Decay because of the way they specifically used animal welfare to boost their brand. It's all over their site. Even a blog about the office staff pets that are allowed to go to work with them. It's a joke.
I don't buy L'oreal actually there stance on animal testing has always been a little shaky for my liking. I've not got one of those brands listed in my kit or home.
I also dont drive cos I'm a drippy green hippy :p but that's another thread. Lol!
CMaquillage wrote: They are taking steps in china to stop animal testing, and UD said in their press release they are working towards that goal
I lived in China. This is like saying Santa Claus will try to stop giving presents.
The naivety is more annoying than the greed. You can not force one culture on another. The culture grows. They are talking about a project that will take 100-200 years to fully achieve. China is the leader in the space race at the moment, but Communism has left it's people sometimes as much as 100 years behind Europe in other areas of life.
they are working towards that goal
This is simply just insulting our intelligence. You think UD is actually face-to-face with Chinese authorities? The Chinese eat turtles, snakes and all kinds of things we have banned as foods. The city I lived in was infested with wild dogs, most of whom are starving and dehydrated and get not a second's consideration from the locals. Their outlook on animals is totally different and there is a big industry in animal products. Some MU company from the West is not even going to scratch that surface. This is ridiculous and basically very dishonest for them to try to convince people that they have any ability at all to change China's mind and encourage China to give up a billion dollar industry.
What impresses me, is that all of you feel the same way about testing.
Estee Lauder, Loreal and the big boys haven't changed China, what makes a small company like UD think they have the magic powers? Of course they know better.....Money usually wins over principles in the end...sad but true.
If you really strongly believe in a cause, you sacrifice for that cause..... The whole animal testing issue is something many companies jump on in order to capture the portion of the market that cares about that issue (it's all about the money)..... the small portion of people in the USA against animal testing can't compete with a world full of people that could care less and companies follow the money.
Average customers also follow the money....The truth is a lot of people in the USA talk about the evils of animal testing and look for the bunny but if you present them with a 25.00 mascara that has a bunny logo and an equal mascara for 5.00 without the logo... most of the animal lovers will go for the 5.00 mascara...NOT ALL (so no need to tell me you're an exception) but most will... Money trumps everything for a vast majority of people as it does companies and so can we fault them? I don't think going to China is a big deal personally but the PR announcement opened my eyes to the idiots they really think most of us are and maybe they're correct? maybe most will buy into the nonsense they put out in that Press release???
It was I think a bad move to go out with a press release....just like I think it's a bad move when companies raise their prices and announce it to their customers and the world.... BAD BAD BAD IDEA..... They should have just done what they felt they needed to do, remove the bunny from everything related to the brand....remove any mention of animal testing and let the chips fall where they may as quietly as possible
Sal W Hanna
Posts: 6,445
Huntington Beach, California, US
MattisJ wrote: As far as I know it is needed by law that products used on humans need to be tested on animals first or something similar..
China's government requires that they perform their own test prior to a product being sold in China. It's not up to UD. All their products are still not animal tested by their choice.
If you don't make a profit you go out of business.
You MUAS survive on new and existing clients. you compete among each other. some will find another place to work because theres not enough business. Why do you think Ford, and GM have overseas markets? why do you think Toyota, Honda, Hyundai open plants here in the USA?
Your ideals don't mean a hill of beans when a multimillion dollar business needs to expand in order to compete. Remember all the feel good rules and environmental laws drove out most of the manufacturing in the USA. Loss of good paying jobs going overseas. This is the law of unintended consequences, I want to know how many of you will step up and volunteer to test out new unproven drugs?
the lonely photographer wrote: If you don't make a profit you go out of business.
You MUAS survive on new and existing clients. you compete among each other. some will find another place to work because theres not enough business. Why do you think Ford, and GM have overseas markets? why do you think Toyota, Honda, Hyundai open plants here in the USA?
Your ideals don't mean a hill of beans when a multimillion dollar business needs to expand in order to compete. Remember all the few good rules and environmental laws drove out most of the manufacturing in the USA. Loss of good paying jobs going overseas. This is the law of unintended consequences, I want to know how many of you will step up and volunteer to test out new unproven drugs?
The OP's intention was to alert those who use UD that there was a major policy change due to this new distribution channel (which was later rescinded).
I'm not understanding the relevance of your rant citing how unimportant we (makeup artists) are and our possible reluctance to be "tested on".
Most of us don't live in a vacuum and understand that our "pro" voice in comparison to a consumer marketplace and global corporate expansion is insignificant. And none of us claimed to be THE social barometer for animal testing. The OP simply offered information for those who want to make a socially conscious choice. Nothing more, nothing less.
Just curious - has some residual angst toward makeup artists caused you to respond so vehemently ...or did you just need to vent in general?
Yeah they completely changed there minds about everything
Jane from British Beauty Blogger sent them an email asking and got this back
"UD Decides Not to Sell in China
After careful consideration of many issues, we have decided not to start selling Urban Decay products in China. While several factors were important in reaching this decision, ultimately we did not feel we could comply with current regulations in China and remain true to our core principles. We know there are many progressive consumers in China who would embrace an opportunity to purchase non-animal tested products - our hope remains that we have the chance to offer Urban Decay products to these consumers someday in the future.
Following our initial announcement, we realized that we needed to step back, carefully review our original plan, and talk to a number of individuals and organizations that were interested in our decision. We regret that we were unable to respond immediately to many of the questions we received, and appreciate the patience our customers have shown as we worked through this difficult issue.
Since our founding in 1996, we have been committed to ending animal testing in the cosmetics industry. As demonstrated by the renewed support we have received from organizations like PETA and the CCIC, this principle remains at our core. Urban Decay does not test its finished products on animals, nor do we allow others to test on our behalf, and we require our suppliers to certify that the raw materials used in the manufacture of our products are not tested on animals. Urban Decay is proud to be100% cruelty-free."
Andii James wrote: Yeah they completely changed there minds about everything
Jane from British Beauty Blogger sent them an email asking and got this back
"UD Decides Not to Sell in China
After careful consideration of many issues, we have decided not to start selling Urban Decay products in China. While several factors were important in reaching this decision, ultimately we did not feel we could comply with current regulations in China and remain true to our core principles. We know there are many progressive consumers in China who would embrace an opportunity to purchase non-animal tested products - our hope remains that we have the chance to offer Urban Decay products to these consumers someday in the future.
Following our initial announcement, we realized that we needed to step back, carefully review our original plan, and talk to a number of individuals and organizations that were interested in our decision. We regret that we were unable to respond immediately to many of the questions we received, and appreciate the patience our customers have shown as we worked through this difficult issue.
Since our founding in 1996, we have been committed to ending animal testing in the cosmetics industry. As demonstrated by the renewed support we have received from organizations like PETA and the CCIC, this principle remains at our core. Urban Decay does not test its finished products on animals, nor do we allow others to test on our behalf, and we require our suppliers to certify that the raw materials used in the manufacture of our products are not tested on animals. Urban Decay is proud to be100% cruelty-free."
do you notice whats missing from this carefully crafted statement?
Urban Decay does not test its finished products on animals (of course they don't who does that?)
nor do we allow others to test on our behalf, (no need to, most of the ingrediants you buy have already been tested)
and we require our suppliers to certify that the raw materials used in the manufacture of our products are not tested on animals.
RAW MATERIAL? why do they make that destinction?
What is Raw material and what is "UNRAW" please someone explain. Thank you
Raw materials have mostly already been tested on animals but they say they don't use those? hmmmmm....need more research.
From the FDA website
- Cruelty Free/Not Tested on Animals
March 14, 1995; Updated February 24, 2000
Some cosmetic companies promote their products with claims such as "CRUELTY-FREE" or "NOT TESTED ON ANIMALS" in their labeling or advertising. The unrestricted use of these phrases by cosmetic companies is possible because there are no legal definitions for these terms.
Some companies may apply such claims solely to their finished cosmetic products. However, these companies may rely on raw material suppliers or contract laboratories to perform any animal testing necessary to substantiate product or ingredient safety. Other cosmetic companies may rely on combinations of scientific literature, non-animal testing, raw material safety testing, or controlled human-use testing to substantiate their product safety.
Many raw materials, used in cosmetics, were tested on animals years ago when they were first introduced. A cosmetic manufacturer might only use those raw materials and base their "cruelty-free" claims on the fact that the materials or products are not "currently" tested on animals.
I still dont know what "unraw" materials are, it appears those can be tested on animals?
Mary wrote: on a side note...Just pointing out that by putting gas in your car you support countries that kill women for having premarital sex....even if it's rape..... women are treated much worse then lab animals in some of these countries.... and yet we fill up our cars with no remorse...why it that?
Because it's more important to maintain the appearance of being caring and compassionate than to actually be so. We all know big oil is evil but what choice do we really have? The recent power outages in my area was a real eye-opener about human nature and our perceived needs.
In the grand scheme of things, what matters to Urban Decay only matters to Urban Decay. They are a minuscule drop in the Chinese bucket.
KJ Bennett Beauty wrote: The OP's intention was to alert those who use UD that there was a major policy change due to this new distribution channel (which was later rescinded).
I'm not understanding the relevance of your rant citing how unimportant we (makeup artists) are and our possible reluctance to be "tested on".
Most of us don't live in a vacuum and understand that our "pro" voice in comparison to a consumer marketplace and global corporate expansion is insignificant. And none of us claimed to be THE social barometer for animal testing. The OP simply offered information for those who want to make a socially conscious choice. Nothing more, nothing less.
Just curious - has some residual angst toward makeup artists caused you to respond so vehemently ...or did you just need to vent in general?
An observation and comment on hypocrisy, I expect UD to sell out to a major player such as Loreal eventually. A business decision to expand into a foreign country? And a change of heart? due to customers complaints about the policy change? I suspect it's the company's inability or unwilling to pay off the proper government handlers to get approval to market in the country. It takes a lot of bribe money to get anything done in that country. The animal testing line is pure bullshit. Remember the poisoned dog food that came out of China and killed pets here in the USA?
Animal testing? lead in the paints used in kids toys? drywall used in Florida homes that became a health hazard?
Like some of the posters said raw ingredients were tested on animals way before it became part of the ingredients in cosmetics. The Chinese have a budding cosmetic industry, they want to protect their own. And I also believe the the company's official party line is considered subversive within the government. They don't want outside agitators putting any ideas about animal rights and such to their people. Considering the export of endangered species to many countries for "medicinal" or health use. Its against their self interest. They probably threw so many obstacles to discourage the company. the company decided to say F this. Yes it's dirty politics. Now if they decide to manufacture in China ,then it's a different story.
| 
| 
| edu