The Term "Cruelty Free" and Why It's Misleading

If you've come in contact with the beauty community and especially the panning community you've probably heard the term "cruelty free". The term describes products that haven't been tested on animals or brands who don't test on animals. But it's really not that simple and personally, I think the term is really misleading.

As an EU citizen where animal testing is outlawed I wrongfully thought that my makeup collection was entirely cruelty free since everything I owned had been bought inside the EU. It isn't that simple. All the biggest companies who want to sell both in the EU and in China  (where animal testing is mandatory) found a loophole. They don't test their products or ingredients on animals so they can sell their products here, but then they pay a third party to test their products for them so that they can tell China their products have been tested on animals and then be a part of that market as well. So, even though you're an EU citizen, you really can't trust your makeup to be cruelty free.

To be considered "cruelty free" in the eyes of organisations like PETA, who then allow you to use the Caring Consumer logo or something, you have to abstain from testing your products and your ingredients on animals, but they don't always require companies to make sure their suppliers don't test on animals. This means that if you really care about not buying products tested on animals, you can't even trust the cruelty free logos. I suggest you read Cruelty- Free Kitty's post about this if you want to know more. That blog is an absolute goldmine. 

Then we have the problem of parent companies. When a brand doesn't test on animals and their suppliers don't and all that jazz you'd think you'd be good to go, but that's not necessarily true. The brand might be owned by another company that does test on animals. That raises the question if you could actually consider the brand cruelty free. In the end, the money goes to a company that supports animal testing.

And lastly, my problem with the actual term "cruelty free". I don't believe there is such a thing. To say that a lipstick is cruelty free doesn't really make sense to me. The lipstick probably isn't cruelty free. If it isn't vegan, I wouldn't consider it cruelty free. If it's not environment friendly (my problem with eco stuff is a rant for later), I wouldn't consider it cruelty free. If it isn't fairtrade marked and ACTUALLY fair trade, I wouldn't consider it cruelty free. The term is there to make us feel good about ourselves because we choose cruelty free options, but they aren't really cruelty free. There should be a better label for products that aren't tested on animals. I don't know what it is, but this label has annoyed me for a bit too long now. Still, I will keep using it until we come up with a better option. The movement to abolish animal testing around the globe is something I support and think is great and I don't want to take anything away from that. I still believe people should go 'cruelty free' and help the beauty industry evolve. The future can always be better and that's something we should work towards. Have a great day and be conscious of your impact on the world! Everything you do has an impact!