Countryside Alliance official statement on Lush - FYI

C

Countryside

Well-Known Member
Joined
8 September 2009
Messages
55
Visit site
Cosmetics firm Lush will “pay for its politics” by alienating thousands of customers with its decision to fund the Hunt Saboteurs’ Association (HSA) with proceeds from a “fox bubble bar” product.

The Hunt Saboteurs Association is an animal rights group which advocates direct action and illegal methods to disrupt hunting activities.

Countryside Alliance Head of Media, Tim Bonner said:
“We are aware that Lush supports animal rights charities, and I am sure they are upset that the Hunting Act has failed. Whilst we support the view that everyone has their right to an opinion, there are groups who legally oppose hunting, and the HSA is not one of them.”

“This is also a very strange commercial decision. Hundreds of thousands of people have demonstrated their support for hunting and the rural way of life and many of them would previously have been Lush customers. On the other hand the number of people supporting an organisation like the HSA is tiny and, let’s be honest, hunt sabs are not the biggest consumers of soap. It is entirely up to Lush who they want to support but they will pay for their politics by alienating thousands of reasonable customers.”
 
[ QUOTE ]
and, let’s be honest, hunt sabs are not the biggest consumers of soap.

[/ QUOTE ]

PMSL
grin.gif
 
It is weird isn't it. When you think of demographics, hunting people are generally rural people, rural people are generally more aware of food miles and generally more into "wholesome" products. so by logic a higher than average proportion of their business will be from people who support hunting, than another cosmetics company. It's just commercial suicide as well as idiotic and wrong!
 
Well, once again I will be supporting Lush. I am surprised at the outcry from you lot on here. Why can't do they do this? You are making out like they are supporting the devil or something?

Are you all saying that all hunt sabs are like this? NO. Of course not, half the time the dodgy people you do see, are not even part of them. Like a thread about dealers the otherday. Don't tar them all with the same brush. If you don't like their product, then don't buy it but don't cut of your nose to spite your face.

xxx
 
[ QUOTE ]
Outcry?.....not really the right word to use...

As this forum..and until the recent dumbing down of the magazine is Horse and HOUND i think this subject is an apt one...

Hunt Sabs are generally members of the un-washed masses belonging to "rent-a-mob" who generally "protest" at all and sundry..because they can.

you support Lush, others don't..."we" both have our reasons to do so..

[/ QUOTE ]

My point being is, of course you do not want to support the product - but now you no longer support a shop who is by a far cry one of the best in terms of animal welfare compared to every other retailer. i.e most (bar a select few often not very commercial) test products on animals and such like.

Also, I hardly see any of you saying well, ''I saw some dodgy hunting going on the other day, sorry not supporting that anymore'' Yet, you are all going under the impression that every hunt sab is vile? No, like I said before, half the time the dodgy ones you come across are not even a part of them. Again, you are all taring with the same brush. Of course you get your dodgy ones, are you saying you don't get dodgy ones your side of the argument?
x
 
[ QUOTE ]
i have bought, and will continue to buy products that are envirionmentally safe and cruelty free long before it became "Faux Fashion" with bandwagon jumpers on every high st and in every magazine...going back to the 1970's...so that particular bit of the "arguement" isn't relevant

i personally believe this arguement has nothing whatsoever to do with green issues/envirionmental issues....but LUSH picking up on and marketing a very clever "idea"....

[/ QUOTE ]

Disagree on both points. A) I am sure most users who shop in towns etc, go to the department stores, Supermarkets, Boots, superdrug etc. None of these products offer a complete free from testing on animals etc (bar body shop, urban decayetc) (though I am pleased to here you shop ethically, not many do - most of the time unknowingly)

B) I don't think they think they are being 'clever' you are looking at them as a big money hungary cooperation who don't care (like all of those shops I previously mentioned) about much else than image and profits. If a shop is selling something 'greener' it's no doubt because of clever marketing and being 'comsumer' focused because they think that's what we want, not because they want to. I feel LUSH are one of the few that actually stand for something else. They disagree with hunting, like most animal welfare organisations.
The money is going to the genuine (and only the money from the campaign products) HSA, not all theback street low level dodgy ones, who decide they are above the law and don't care who they hurt; horse, hound, human in the process. Please don't think of whatever encounters or stories you have heard means they are all like that - simply not fair or true.

xx
 
[ QUOTE ]
Delightful display of ignorance there dear, given it's illegal in the UK to test ANY cosmetic product on animals. Pfft
smirk.gif


[/ QUOTE ]

Good point. You will find that's why it's all done abroad.
 
Do you actively shop for 'cruelty free' products? If you did, you would find that Lush are very definitely not one of the only businesses to promote and sell these products...there are many smaller, cottage industry sellers who also have morals and ethics. The difference being they don't have the huge PR machine behind them that Lush does. Also, Lush products aren't as natural as they'd have you believe...plenty of synthetic chemicals to be found in their ingredients list...
 
[ QUOTE ]
point A...I don't shop "in town"...

point B....Their Marketing Dept is being Clever...or we wouldn't be having this discussion on here.

[/ QUOTE ]

Clever. Wouldn't use that word.

Risky, yes. Brave, yes. Not clever. Look at the reception from this forum. They are gaining nothing but negative responses. They compaign - that's what they do.

xxx
 
[ QUOTE ]
Well, once again I will be supporting Lush. I am surprised at the outcry from you lot on here. Why can't do they do this? You are making out like they are supporting the devil or something?

Are you all saying that all hunt sabs are like this? NO. Of course not, half the time the dodgy people you do see, are not even part of them. Like a thread about dealers the otherday. Don't tar them all with the same brush. If you don't like their product, then don't buy it but don't cut of your nose to spite your face.

xxx

[/ QUOTE ]

What annoys me though about this with Lush though is. They say they want to prevent Foxhunting and animal cruelty....this is absolutely fine. Although I may not agree fully with what they are doing I applaud them. HOWEVER I do not support them choosing the hunt sabs for one what to the the hunt sabs actually do? Are they the ones bringing about law changes to ban hunting? No
Are they the ones attempting to bring hunts who break the law to justice? No

What they actually do is demonstrate and cause public disturbance and what is currently a legal activity (unless a hunt chases a live quarry it is legal) meaning that police presence is required 'just in case' of trouble. Yet they don't do any good in the bigger picture apart from anger all and sundry around them.

If Lush wanted to donate the money from this product to the League against Cruel Sports I feel it would be a much better thing. The LACS at least work to ensure that all hunts operate within the law. As far as I'm aware they are the only ones that have attempted to bring legal action against hunts which haven't followed the law. They were the ones that helped bring in the law in the first place!
The money donated would still be doing the same thing (preventing foxhunting) just in a better and less spiteful way.
 
[ QUOTE ]
Do you actively shop for 'cruelty free' products? If you did, you would find that Lush are very definitely not one of the only businesses to promote and sell these products...there are many smaller, cottage industry sellers who also have morals and ethics. The difference being they don't have the huge PR machine behind them that Lush does. Also, Lush products aren't as natural as they'd have you believe...plenty of synthetic chemicals to be found in their ingredients list...

[/ QUOTE ]

Me.. Personally? I shop from a range of shops. But I cannot drive to my closest town and pick up anything! Because they have all been tested on animals! Pick up any magazine (OK, I don't buy 'celeb' mags, but if I have come across one, all the products in there are not safe) I used to use clinique (they said they didn't test - they do) And once I started to look into it - all the products I used, did.
Literally even if it says'' We are against testing on animals and refund into alternatives'' that's just clever marketing.

The reason I like Lush, is everyone is not going to make the same effort i am/do, making sure it's safe to use. So this way, I figure every girl who walks into there easily accessible store (i.e one in most towns) will buy there products and no animals were harmed... Whether they care or not.

xxx
 
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Well, once again I will be supporting Lush. I am surprised at the outcry from you lot on here. Why can't do they do this? You are making out like they are supporting the devil or something?

Are you all saying that all hunt sabs are like this? NO. Of course not, half the time the dodgy people you do see, are not even part of them. Like a thread about dealers the otherday. Don't tar them all with the same brush. If you don't like their product, then don't buy it but don't cut of your nose to spite your face.

xxx

[/ QUOTE ]

What annoys me though about this with Lush though is. They say they want to prevent Foxhunting and animal cruelty....this is absolutely fine. Although I may not agree fully with what they are doing I applaud them. HOWEVER I do not support them choosing the hunt sabs for one what to the the hunt sabs actually do? Are they the ones bringing about law changes to ban hunting? No
Are they the ones attempting to bring hunts who break the law to justice? No

What they actually do is demonstrate and cause public disturbance and what is currently a legal activity (unless a hunt chases a live quarry it is legal) meaning that police presence is required 'just in case' of trouble. Yet they don't do any good in the bigger picture apart from anger all and sundry around them.

If Lush wanted to donate the money from this product to the League against Cruel Sports I feel it would be a much better thing. The LACS at least work to ensure that all hunts operate within the law. As far as I'm aware they are the only ones that have attempted to bring legal action against hunts which haven't followed the law. They were the ones that helped bring in the law in the first place!
The money donated would still be doing the same thing (preventing foxhunting) just in a better and less spiteful way.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yep. Nicely written. I see your point, but remember whilst there are dodgy ones (who frankly are dangerous) doesn't mean they are all like this you we all know that. There are dodgy hunts out there (and we all know it) does that mean the Countryside Alliance, shouldn't be supporting them?
x
 
As you're posting on the forum, I presume you have regular access to the internet? If you took the trouble to do a search for natural bath and body products you'd find a plethora of online sellers who sell the type of products of which you speak.
smile.gif
 
It is true that a few bad apples have spoilt a lot of peoples view on hunt sabs and I'm sure that not all of them are the trouble causing rent-a-mob that I have had the misfortune to come across.

I just fail to see what supporting the HSA will achieve? Is it really saving the fluffy ickle foxes or just ensuring that the perceived stuck up toffs don't get their fun day of hunting (which I say again is completly legal)?
Honestly I think that if you are truely anti foxhunting the best way to stop it is to support a credible association that works with the law to ensure that hunting is done legally.
By supporting the League against Cruel Sports they would also be helping to stop bullfighting and snaring....surely that would please much more people
wink.gif
 
[ QUOTE ]
Well, once again I will be supporting Lush. I am surprised at the outcry from you lot on here. Why can't do they do this? You are making out like they are supporting the devil or something?


[/ QUOTE ]

This is Horse & HOUNDS online honey, i think a fair few of the users will be pro hunt...you know the thing they do with HOUNDS...you'll see pics in the H&H magazine
smile.gif


The HSA are animal terrorist, it's one thinkg to be anti, it's another to take illegal steps to disrupt a legal hunt meeting.

I will be publishing this on my facebook to give everyone a good laugh
smile.gif
 
I still have a bee in my bonnet about Lush causing thrush!

I remain on the fence but have no time for sabs - and as a result wouldn't buy anything from Lush now (even if it didn't make me itch).
 
I'm a bit annoyed at the pro-hunting people on here making this out to be a pro/anti hunting thing.

Whatever your stance on hunting, the HSA is a horrible, horrible organisation or bloodthirsty savage evil people, who cause a LOT of pain and suffering for men, women, children, and moreso - animals.

It doesn't matter whether you do or don't support the ban. If lush released a product which was anti-hunting, pro-animal rights etc, then I would be fine. It is this particular organisation which it is wrong of them to support.

By you pro-hunting people saying "I'm not going to support something which supports the hunting ban" you are losing the cause instantly.

I have anti-hunting friends who have been upset about this, people who are pro-animal rights, and involved in animal rights charities. They don't like the HSA, and they don't like Lush for doing this.

Don't ruin sound attempts to stop this by bringing the hunting ban into it.
 
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Yep. Nicely written. I see your point, but remember whilst there are dodgy ones (who frankly are dangerous) doesn't mean they are all like this you we all know that. There are dodgy hunts out there (and we all know it) does that mean the Countryside Alliance, shouldn't be supporting them?
x

[/ QUOTE ]

The Countryside Alliance would not support anyone who actively went out to break the law.
 
Just as a quick aside, as TBS was mentioned earlier...The Body Shop is listed on one site as being a company to avoid with regards animal testing...cruelty free shopping was the site.
 
[ QUOTE ]
I see your point, but remember whilst there are dodgy ones (who frankly are dangerous) doesn't mean they are all like this you we all know that. There are dodgy hunts out there (and we all know it) does that mean the Countryside Alliance, shouldn't be supporting them?


[/ QUOTE ]

No it doesn't, and no they don't. Are you aware of the CA's policies on illegal hunting methods? How they react to cruel and illegal methods?

Many animal rights charities are aginst the HSA because of the cruel and illegal methods they use - barbed wire round horses legs, acid in dogs eyes, stones and bricks hurled at horses & hounds.

The HSA are not the only animal rights charity! I can't understand why you seem to think that that the HSA is a nice organisation with a few oddballs - people who are anti-hunting, anti cruelty etcetc join the League Against Cruel Sports, wildlife trusts et. They do not join the HSA.

Many of my friends are involved in animal rights charities and they are as equally against this as I am, because the HSA is NOT a nice organisation. They will stop at nothing - hurting people and animals to cause upset and disruption.

Don't be so naive, I'm just shocked you seem to think the HSA is the only animal rights charity. It does not come anywhere near to he countryside alliance, which does in actual fact work WITH the government and police forces for things such as dog fighting, illegal and cruel trapping, country and nature preservation. As opposed to the HSA, which tries to destroy people, animals and the police.
 
[ QUOTE ]


Whatever your stance on hunting, the HSA is a horrible, horrible organisation or bloodthirsty savage evil people, who cause a LOT of pain and suffering for men, women, children, and moreso - animals.

It doesn't matter whether you do or don't support the ban. If lush released a product which was anti-hunting, pro-animal rights etc, then I would be fine. It is this particular organisation which it is wrong of them to support.

.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with you 100% on these points (in fact your whole post but mostly these)
 
Practically every product used by man (ok, woman) has been tested on an animal at some point, so to state 'cruelty free' is a bit misleading. The company manufacturing the product may not have tested it, but all of its constituent parts are more than likely to have been at some point in the past.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top