We recently have seen the news of the new face representing the brand Cover Girl. James Charles. A male. We are in a different age now. We are now breaking down boundaries with gender. And I think that’s fucking amazing. Of course, there have been some horrible comments about it all. But there is still a community supporting James Charles. I support this new face as well. But I have conflicting emotions. And it has nothing to do with a male being the face of a cosmetic brand that is Cover Girl. The conflict is within putting money into a company that supports supports all humans. But wanting to remain cruelty-free.
I make myself very clear that I try my best to make choices with the animals in mind. With food. With household cleaning products. Hygiene. And makeup. Even choosing to take the next step to buy something without animal by-product. The treatment of animals is the first thing in my mind when choosing to buy something. But what if the brand like Cover Girl does what they do? Show diversity? We are in a day and age where there is a division that I had not seen before. And even with that in mind, Cover Girl has shown that they will put someone like James Charles up as the face to represent the brand. Knowing what criticism they may face. While they could have picked so many female makeup artists on Youtube, they picked him.
I have had these conflicting feelings before. When transitioning to cruelty-free, I did not want to leave Cover Girl behind. They had people through the years like Ellen, Sofia Vergara, Katy Perry, Taylor Swift, Queen Latifah, Janelle Monae and the list goes on. They’ve shown that regardless of what your skin tone is, sexuality, or where you were born, you are welcomed to the brand. Could it be good marketing? Yeah. Very likely. But does it really matter? If you are welcomed no matter what isn’t that what we want from a brand? But here is my real question. While people like me who are a part of the cruelty-free community are making choices based on moral practices, shouldn’t that count humans as well? 
Considering the fact that they knew they might lose customers based on this, they did it anyway. That takes courage. It is money lost. I feel like that says something. It may be easy for a lot of the people in the cruelty-free community to stay firm with their choice and say that they will still not support the brand based on their animal testing policy. And I respect that. Does this mean I will buy brands like Rimmel, Revlon, Maybelline, or any other animal tested brand in the drugstore? No. Not unless they chose to stop animal testing altogether. To be cruelty-free for me also means to support a brand that shown they embrace diversity. People who choose to boycott companies like Cover Girl based on the animal testing may or may not support this choice. But my interest is with treating both animals and humans with respect.
I have said this before to many people, your dollar is not the only thing that does the talking. If you want to see a change, speak up. Be persistent. But don’t be rude about it. Let Cover Girl know that you support what they are doing but you want them to live up to their full potential to the brand they have been showing they really are. Let them know you want them to stop testing on animals. And let them know regularly . 
I know some people will argue and ask why not just focus attention on already cruelty-free, vegan-friendly, or eco brands. Covergirl is very affordable. Available to people all ages and available in many places. From Ulta to Walmart. And those are just the two most obvious. Whether you’re busy in school or a parent on a budget, Covergirl has prices most can afford. Why not encourage them to reach their full potential? If they were to become 100% cruelty-free, the would have the support of even more people and set a new standard for other brands in drugstores and for younger consumers. 

 

Advertisements