Is Putting Makeup On Money Cruel?

Impactful Ninja is reader-supported. When you buy through links on our site, we may earn an affiliate committee. Learn more Learn more .

Affiliate Disclosure

Hey boyfriend impactful ninja ?

Y'all may have noticed that Impactful Ninja is all about providing helpful information to make a positive impact on the world and gild. And that we love to link dorsum to where we found all the information for each of our posts.

Most of these links are informational-based for you to check out their primary sources with one click.
Only some of these links are and so-called "affiliate links" to products that we recommend.

Why do we add together these production links?

First and foremost, because we believe that they add value to you. For instance, when we wrote a mail about the environmental touch on of long showers, we came across an EPA recommendation to use WaterSense showerheads. So nosotros linked to where y'all tin find them. Or, for many of our posts, we also link to our favorite books on that topic so that you can get a much more than holistic overview than ane single blog postal service could provide.

And when at that place is an affiliate program for these products, we sign upwards for it. For instance, as Amazon Associates, we earn from qualifying purchases.

What exercise these chapter links mean for you?

First, and near importantly, we notwithstanding only recommend products that nosotros believe add value for yous.
When you purchase something through one of our chapter links, we may earn a small commission - but at no additional costs to you lot.
And when you buy something through a link that is not an affiliate link, nosotros won't receive whatever commission but we'll all the same be happy to have helped you.

What do these affiliate links mean for united states of america?

When we observe products that we believe add value to you lot and the seller has an chapter programme, we sign upwards for it.
When you buy something through one of our chapter links, we may earn a small commission (at no actress costs to you).
And at this signal in time, all money is reinvested in sharing the almost helpful content with you. This includes all operating costs for running this site and the content creation itself.

What does this mean for me personally?

You lot may have noticed by the way Impactful Ninja is operated that money is not the driving factor behind information technology. Information technology is a passion project of mine and I love to share helpful information with y'all to brand a positive impact on the world and society. However, it's a project in that I invest a lot of fourth dimension and also quite some money.

Eventually, my dream is to i twenty-four hours plow this passion project into my total-time task and provide even more helpful information. But that's still a long fourth dimension to go.

Stay impactful,

Beauty brands worldwide have had several controversies surrounding the manufacture over the terminal few years, with nigh drama occurring on social media. And many makeup companies' blunders inspired some very entertaining headlines. But when all the smoke and chat room-dust had settled, nosotros had several brands left standing in the unethical spotlight. So nosotros had to ask: What are the most unethical makeup companies?

The most unethical makeup companies include brands that still test on animals similar Nars, Clinique, Victoria'southward Secret, Maybelline, Benefit, Chanel, and more. Other makeup companies have unethical working conditions and do private labeling, selling other brands' products as originals.

We see a growing number of once-respected brands sell out on their commitments to ethical practices that kept the states loyal for decades. We have also embraced several companies aslope our influencers on social media only to find that we were duped into a scheme that sold poor-quality makeup at luxury prices. We're pledging to be more savvy consumers and it starts past avoiding these unethical brands.

Related: Your actions and choices dramatically affect the earth around y'all. But did yous know that in that location are simple, reliable techniques you tin can use to live more ethically in a way that is not only healthy only also for order at large? Cheque out the book Exercise The Right Thing: Living Ethically in an Unethical Earth (link to Amazon) to run into how you lot tin can hands use these in your daily life.

26 Makeup Companies Still Conducting Fauna Testing

According to PETA, the following popular makeup brands are still testing on animals, many of which were called out directly on PETA's website. Many of these brands are considered cruelty-free; however, as you will run across, this is not ever the case. With all these brands, the issue is in the fine print, wherein a make can legally merits to be cruelty-free "except when required past law."

And if the brand is sold in Communist china–where brute testing is required past law–and so this means the brand is not actually cruelty-gratis. If you are curious virtually any particular brand, you can usually find this data provided on their website.

O.P.I.

O.P.I. was once on PETA's Beauty Without Bunnies list. Withal, the brand (endemic by Coty, Inc.) was removed from the list when PETA discovered the company had abandoned its anti-animal testing policy and sold products in the Chinese market. Now it is but one of many brands that accept sold out its ethics and upstanding principles for the risk to make coin in China.

NARS

NARS once served many equally the staple brand for cruelty-gratuitous makeup. Unfortunately, in early 2020, the make updated its animal testing policy, as information technology recently joined into the Chinese marketplace. What does that exactly hateful? Unfortunately this ways that NARS now conducts animate being tests where required by law. They are no longer a cruelty-costless brand.

Fifty'Oreal

Fifty'Oreal is no exception to the legal loophole that allows them to merits that they no longer test on animals. And while the company has made corking progress in its commitment to eliminate creature testing, PETA still lists it as a "do test" brand. Like PETA, nosotros hope to run across Fifty'Oreal commit to leaving the Chinese market then that it can be fully free from animal cruelty.

Maybelline & Lancôme

Maybelline is a pop drugstore brand that many adore, and Lancôme has been the staple mascara provider for many over the years. But both companies share their policies with their parent visitor, L'Oreal. And and so long as the brands are sold in China, where strange cosmetics must undergo mandatory animal testing, Maybelline and Lancôme cannot exist considered cruelty-gratuitous brands.

Benefit

Do good has been hailed by many as cruelty-free, simply this is not truthful. The brand'due south policy is non to test unless required by constabulary, and it sells its products in mainland China. Do good currently sells out of Sephora in Cathay with no indication of leaving whatever fourth dimension before long.

Victoria's Surreptitious

Victoria'due south Hugger-mugger spent years upholding a policy that said the brand would never examination on animals. Never say never, as it were, because the visitor ultimately chose profits over its principles, letting down many consumers when the make expanded into China.

Apparently, the company that was one time vowed against animal cruelty was only against information technology until the toll was right. Victoria Secret now joins the others on this list to pay for the roughshod and deadly testing required in commutation for the thousand amounts of coin companies stand to make off the big Chinese population.

Revlon, Almay, and Elizabeth Arden

Revlon is the parent visitor of both Almay and Elizabeth Arden, and all brands share Revlon's policy that states brute testing is done "where required by police." Almay may seem to be cruelty-costless with its "make clean" and "effortless" mental attitude, just information technology still is sold in People's republic of china and is even so subjected to required animal testing.

Elizabeth Arden even claims to be committed to eliminating animal testing; however, as long every bit the brands are sold in People's republic of china, they will show themselves to be more committed to coin.

Rimmel London

Rimmel London carries the claim that it is against animal testing, but the brand, similar so many others, is sold in China. When asked about this, the company turned the blame onto Chinese consumers, stating the people want Rimmel London products and that it wouldn't be right to deprive them of what they want. The visitor shares its policy with its parent company Coty, Inc.

Chanel

Chanel is not considered a cruelty-gratuitous brand. Equally is common with nearly of these companies, Chanel's policy on animal testing is unavailable on the brand's website. Only we know its products are sold in Communist china, and we know that they must test on animals in social club to do so.

Estée Lauder & Its Subsidiaries

Estée Lauder claims to be committed to eliminating animal testing, but not committed plenty to stop selling in the Chinese market. It is also the parent company of several pop subsidiaries which are also on PETA's list, including:

Clinique
Bobbi Brown
La Mer
GLAMGLOW
Origins

These companies are all subject to the aforementioned animal-testing policy with the clause that requires it in China, keeping them all from being cruelty-free.

In add-on, Estée Lauder has managed to upset many of its customers over the 2020 vacation, as many people placed orders only never had them fulfilled. The company took its time in responding to angry customers about the upshot, just to offer a generic, insincere sounding, corporate response. Worse however, many customers still have not received their product or a refund.

Chiliad.A.C. Cosmetics

Thou.A.C. is also owned by Estée Lauder, though many are unaware of the connectedness. Nosotros call the brand out separately from its sister companies in a higher place because it is easily one of the most well-known and most popular makeup brands always. And for a long time, Thou.A.C. was a cruelty-gratuitous make.

Notwithstanding, being a subsidiary of Estée Lauder, M.A.C. is also subjected to the fauna testing policy since its products are sold in People's republic of china.

Mary Kay

Mary Kay representatives are oft unknowing peddlers of misinformation when it comes to the brand'due south policy on creature testing. They all echo the brand'southward merits nearly non testing on animals, but Mary Kay has the aforementioned "where required by law" dominion equally all the rest listed here.

In 1989, the company appear the halt of all animate being testing on its products. Unfortunately, in 2012, Mary Kay decided to first selling its products in Prc, and they began testing on animals once again and continues to do then today.

Avon

Avon is some other brand that benefits from misleading their representatives, who then fool the customers unwittingly for them. The company holds claim as the first major makeup company to stop beast testing on its products back in the '90s, equally they take "a deep respect for creature welfare."

But it was discovered that Avon authorizes and pays local Chinese officials to comport animate being testing for them. This style, the make tin can nonetheless sell its products in China without bothering it with that pesky legality clause like all these other brands on this list. Although, it would seem like its "deep respect" claim is just a carefully worded distraction from the fact that Avon is not a cruelty-gratuitous brand.

Bourjois

Bourjois is a trendy French makeup brand previously endemic by Chanel, which was probable involved with animal testing. Coty Inc. acquired the brand in 2015, but nosotros know that this was a mere sidestep equally far as ethical practices are concerned. Bourjois products are tested on animals, and the brand is not considered cruelty-costless.

Brand Up for E'er

Brand Up For Ever is a theatrical-quality brand love by makeup artists for its bright, long-lasting appearance. Owned past LVMH (Louis Vuitton/Moët Hennessy), Make Up For E'er is sold at Sephora, and, yes, it is also sold in Red china. For this reason, this brand was also called out by PETA for creature testing.

Dior & Guerlain

Dior and Guerlain are both LVMH endemic as well, and, like all luxury brands that sell in mainland Mainland china, they test on animals. Guerlain says they "are strongly opposed to creature testing and have developed recognized expertise in alternatives to brute testing." But this just sounds like another clever fashion of maxim someone else does testing on the brand'due south behalf.

Burberry

Burberry has managed to convince some that they are more ethical than they are, leading to some misbelief that the company remains cruelty-gratuitous. This is due, in role, to its PETA entrada, and while the company has made some improvements, information technology nonetheless has a long style to go. Unfortunately, Burberry is nonetheless testing on animals since its products are sold in People's republic of china.

4 Makeup Companies That Don't Seem To Care Nearly You

Z Palette

Y'all may call back the hype in 2017 on social media surrounding something chosen the Z Potter. This is a special device created past Z Palette that, at the fourth dimension, the company chosen "game-irresolute."

The device's purpose was to save you time, makeup, and money by removing makeup from its original packaging. The heat helps to release the makeup from its packaging, substantially melting lipsticks and concealers, which yous can then use to create your own palettes. This was an exciting prospect for many, who ultimately chose to buy into the idea and buy the device, which came with a pretty hefty $85 price tag.

However, many were taken aback when they received their order to detect that they essentially had purchased nothing more than a hotplate. Many injure customers voiced their negative feedback on Z Palette'due south social media accounts, questioning both the price and practicality. But the replies from the brand's Public Relations personnel in accuse of social media shocked and insulted customers.

Z Palette's social media responses to several client critiques were considered past many as bullying from the company. Many responses chosen customers names, while some clearly expressed the brand was uninterested in retaining customers that they didn't deem worthy. Z Palette also insulted its customers' intelligence, mocking that there was a departure between hotplates and induction, however offered no didactics on the matter.

The company comments were then bad that some speculated they had been hacked and someone was trying to make them look bad. Alas, they had not been hacked.

At the time, many boycotted the company; after, many retailers dropped the brand. Now, years subsequently, Z Palette has dropped the price on its Z Potter to $59. However, there has been no attempt to "re-brand" or absolve for the ugliness of its past, which leaves many still bitter and boycotting the bullies they have established themselves to exist.

Morphe

While many customers rave virtually this make and its low prices, Morphe has a hard time convincing others that they care almost anything other than manipulating them out of their money. It took some fourth dimension for those who follow beauty influencers and makeup brands on social media to figure it out because they seem to exist a good company that'south all well-nigh working with influencers. Though, that ought to accept been the kickoff clue.

With all the drama surrounding the brand, customers take started accusing Morphe of non caring about quality, which no longer lives upwards to the hype, claiming the brand is only focused on exploiting influencers to brand money, abusing the trust and loyalty that influencers have with their followers.

Only perchance the make'south biggest scandal was in 2020 when the Jaclyn Colina original palette formula was changed without warning. The change had caused the pallets to no longer be vegan–a characteristic that was very of import to many of its customers. When originally confronted, the visitor lied about the change it had attempted to keep hidden.

Once the public chosen it out, Jaclyn apologized, claiming she was unaware of such details. The company also admitted it withheld such data from her. Of grade, this is more proof for many customers that the brand merely exploits influencers to pawn its cheap makeup off on their followers.

Another controversy surrounding the brand for years now is that Crowne and Morphe are the same visitor. The BeautyGuruChatter community on Reddit believed Morphe to be a private labeling company. If true, this ways the brand does not make its own products; rather, it purchases products from other companies and places its own name and logo on them. And if that's the example, then Morphe's claims that information technology develops its own formulas are bogus.

And that ways yous could be ownership the aforementioned stuff with a Crowne label at a lower price.

ColourPop

ColourPop is a make that is by and large well-loved by its customers for keen products and affordable prices. But a few stumbles with some launches take had customers scratching their heads.

1 such stumble was a few years ago at the release of its profile Sculpting Stix. Names like "Typo" and "Yikes" were used to name darker shades, which some felt was disrespectful to the company's customers of color. The company was quick to apologize and change the names, merely the impairment had been washed for many. ColourPop has been very selective most how it names its shades ever since.

The brand besides was accused of selling contaminated lipsticks in reviews that surfaced after several customers had issues with their products from the Disney collection. Claims of hair, white fuzz, and black dots on the exterior of the products were reported. Accusations of poor-quality products continue to make full review boards online.

But the thing everyone is talking about these days is the speculation that ColourPop is reselling its products repackaged as Kylie Cosmetics. Both companies originally denied this to be true, still many remained skeptical.

Information technology was afterwards discovered the two brands merged nether a parent visitor of their ain creation, Seed Beauty, to better control all aspects of their business. It'due south not a horrible business organisation determination by whatsoever stretch, simply this doesn't sit well for many consumers, as many feel the clan was a downgrade for the visitor. And it certainly didn't squelch the theory that they repackage their products.

Kylie Cosmetics

Kylie, Kylie, Kylie. She certainly has had her off-white share of issues with her dazzler launches. And she has been accused of almost every unethical and poor business practice at that place is, leading many to the determination that her makeup brand is worth less than the hype it rode in on.

First, the make was chosen out for its terrible lipstick applicators. Kylie addressed this issue. Merely then the accusation surfaced that her lipsticks were just ColourPop'due south sometime products repackaged. And we already know how that turned out.

The brand was also called out for overpriced and tardily shipping, and Kylie was even sued for intellectual belongings theft.

Then at that place was the scandal, which did not pass the aroma examination for many of Kylie's customers. Her Royal Peach Palette had several lament the odor gave them headaches, with at to the lowest degree 15 customers filing complaints with the Ameliorate Business Bureau proverb they smelled chemicals and gum when they opened the container.

Overall, many feel that the buzz behind the brand was hyped to inflate the visitor's perceived value by its customers–an exaggeration that is required in the amusement concern and pays off in spades. And many take noticed Kylie's sudden absence from the makeup scene, accusing her of not caring now that her visitor isn't in the platonic lime-calorie-free she prefers.

And to the dismay of many, the brand is not completely vegan, calculation insult to the many, many injuries. (Though the brand does take some vegan products.) It is also not Leaping Bunny certified. However, to its credit, the brand is considered cruelty free. Simply information technology should be noted that Kylie Cosmetics is 51% owned by Coty Inc., which does participate in beast testing in some places (mostly in Prc).

Last but certainly not least, reports have surfaced that call out unethical working conditions in the brand's laboratories. It is said that employees have not been provided sufficient protective equipment and brand minimum wage without benefits. Some workers have too claimed to get headaches from chemic smells.

The Mica Issue in the Makeup Industry

If you haven't yet heard about the mica controversy, it's time you did. This information has been spreading around the earth for years now, with many in America only now becoming aware of the effect. And unfortunately, the news is grim, as in that location is well-nigh no escaping unethical dazzler.

Believed to accept etymological influence from the Latin micare, meaning to wink, smooth, or glitter, mica refers to a collection of several crystalline minerals. Mica is used every bit an ingredient for dozens of industries to add together shimmer to anything from paint to toothpaste to lotion and, yeah, cosmetics. In fact, you'd exist hard-pressed to find a piece of makeup you own that doesn't accept mica in it.

Refinery29 helped expose mica's issue in an investigative documentary and an accompanying article called Mica: The Makeup Industry's Darkest Secret. We suggest you take half an 60 minutes to check out. It does a dainty job of compacting an overview of this incredibly complex topic that has exposed the earth to yet some other instance of child labor.

Republic of india has a big monopoly on the mica mining industry, accounting for roughly sixty% of the world'south mica, with 25% coming from regions where kid labor is prevalent. And those who live in these villages that are arable with this resource ofttimes detect themselves at the mercy of its demand. Abuse has infiltrated the manufacture throughout the supply concatenation, and many families are forced to put their children to work because they are and then dependent upon the income.

Unfortunately, information technology has been discovered that in that location is admittedly no transparency in many of these mines, so there is no way of knowing if the mica used in your makeup was sourced with child labor or not.

Some makeup brands have embraced synthetic mica as an ethical alternative to this association with child labor. And while this is a great option, the complication of the issue wherein so many of these families rely on the industry to survive, the answer is not in boycotting the natural ingredient altogether.

While you can choose to address this thing all the same you see fit, we propose that you help put the pressure on makeup companies to do their part by supporting brands that are actively involved in taking activity and fugitive brands that aren't. Many brands have come together to form the Responsible Mica Initiative (R.Thou.I.), which is committed to eliminating kid labor from the Mica supply concatenation in the states of Bihar and Jharkhand in India by 2022.

But it should be noted that the sourcing of natural ingredients for cosmetics has environmental, social, and governance risks (referred to as E.Due south.One thousand. risks), which range across the entire supply concatenation and threatens the reputation of the dazzler industry as a whole. Indeed, unsustainable and unethical practices are then deeply instilled within the industry, and the trouble is worse than many originally thought it to be.

Avoid Brands Using Unethical Advertizing

Studies in neuroscience have revealed that a mere 5% of cognitive activities, including emotions, deportment, and decisions, are conscious. The other 95% are not-witting. This can explain why so many of united states of america tend to gravitate "naturally" toward more eco-friendly and ethical brands.

Merely research also shows that consumers are driven past emotions when information technology comes to beauty products.

Information technology was as well determined that consumers get higher satisfaction and greater validation in brands that strengthen and feed the perception that using a product is "caring for oneself." And oftentimes, companies are promoting themselves as "natural" or "organic" or "prophylactic" (fifty-fifty when they aren't) to play into your unconscious decisions to buy green.

And unfortunately, the F.D.A. doesn't fifty-fifty regulate most of these claims in cosmetics products, and companies can get abroad with making these claims.

But what'south worse is many brands take resorted to literal fear-mongering in some of their advertisements to convince yous they are the superior brand. Such tactics are highly unethical, and yous should exist cautious to avert falling for them. Oftentimes, anyone trying to focus on something or someone else is normally trying to hide their own crimes, failures, or shortcomings.

Concluding Thoughts

Unfortunately, unethical practices have become somewhat commonplace for makeup companies. Indeed, the entire dazzler industry is inadvertently associated with child labor due to its apply of mica. And fast-makeup brands have proven to be just as unsustainable as fast-fashion brands. Many companies are trying hard to avoid these ethical pitfalls, just nosotros consumers must do our due diligence to ensure we back up brands that are 18-carat in such efforts.