Cruelty Free MakeUp- yeah right!



(Author's Note:  Because of some violence in this post, this is highly recommended PMS reading)

First of all, i will tell you what you will not get from this post.

This post will not promote nor  criticize those that support animal rights at whatever cost.
If them guys prefer to go naked  for their cause - i say we let them.
This "strip" is nicked from Dilbert.  
If they feel so much love for animals that they are willing to assault a rich bitch wearing mink- i say they should be free to do so!  
If they do that to me, I also am free to take off my stilettos, run the hell after them (and i promise i will catch them, i used to be a damn good sprinter and i have been spinning like hell lately) and shove my mink up their arse.  While I am at it, I will pull out a hair sample, give it to my witch doctor who will cast a spell that will make their skin burst with boils and worms that cannot be cured because not enough animals have been tested to find a cure.   
They are free to ask me to change my blog name to"Beauty and the Humanshit" to be fair to bulls who are being blamed for what is really manmade shit - in fact, that request actually makes sense.    But I also have the right to politely respond- "F*ck off and mind your own shit, biatch".
Democracy rocks.  Or is that anarchy- gawd, i always get confused with the two.
This post will not take the position of which is more important, humans or animals.
I think this question is personal and no amount of other people's opinion will determine which is more important to each individual.
For example, if I get AIDS and you ask me, Rowena, we have to torture your beloved dog Barney* to save you.  I would choose to die.  However, if that is my mother in question (though i do not think that is possible, as she is a born again virgin), I will perhaps insist they test on me instead of Barney but my mom will not allow that.   
Unfortunately for Barney, because he cannot talk, he will not have a say on the matter.  Yes, life is unfair - animals should be able to talk, really.
If you say, i will not go to heaven if i eat pork barbecue because pigs are actually angels from heaven.  I will say, "Well hello Satan!  Do I have a heavenly pork barbecue recipe to share with you! "
So that out of the way, let us go to something actually related to this blog-

The Bullshit on No Animal Testing for Beauty.

I see that most tend to have strong opinion on this.   Thank you for taking the time to answer the poll.
172 voted and survey said :
  • 20 or 11% PRO animal testing for cosmetics and medicine purposes
  • 89 or 61% pro testing for medicine only
  • 63 or 36% are ANTI  animal testing.
  • Jessica and countless others do not really care and they were not counted- because some senile blogger forgot to put "don't really care" in the poll.   
And gawd, I have the most utmost respect for your opinion- whether you are pro or anti - really.

BUT- this is what i feel strongly on-

If you were to take a strong position pro or anti animal testing, you better be sure you are basing your opinion on solid facts, not hearsay, not propaganda, not staged videos, not hasty baseless generalizations and that before passion takes over (and i do think that passion is a good thing), that your mind has processed the facts first.

To give you the facts- I went to great lengths.

First, I went to the anti-animal testing camp.
And man, these people are real MARKETEERS.  Their site is non-stop entertainment!
There were celebrities, naked celebrities, fancy awards night, lots of nudity, scandal, violence and gore!  Name all the marketeering tactics in the book, and they have exploited it!  
But then, let us not take it against them that they know how to market.  (haha! yeah right!)

Then I went to the pro-animal testing camp.
Ah, the scientists!  Instantly, I regret having committed to writing this article.  These boys are boring.  I actually had to read!  It would have helped if some chemists were cute- but no luck in this department either, just a handful of dorky nobel prize winners and pure logic- what use does a girl have for that.   
If ever they asked me to market them, the first thing i will do is a geek sexy calendar to help their image, probably shirtless while raising a test tube that has the cure for polio (i might have to outsource talent- but heck, what is a little marketing in the name of science).  But, I digress.
But I will not take their boring arguments against them either.

The funny thing I noticed though is that Pamela Sue Anderson took her clothes off to protest anti animal testing, then took her clothes off again to support finding a cure for AIDS.

That is - pardon the pun- milking both sides of the issue.

But oopsie- seems that Pamela is not the only guilty pair of boobies here.


The hard facts:

1. We want to be pretty and demand that we be safe in our quest for beauty.
Oh, yes we do- no ifs, buts about it. 
2. Cosmetic Regulators, tasked by politicians to keep voters/consumers happy – will in turn require companies selling products for animal testing to prove safety.
No proof, no permit. Simple as that. Forget all this conspiracy theory shit. (for now at least). 
Good news is, tests only have to be done on an ingredient once. That is already one great heave of relief. 
3. With existing ingredients already tested safe and some testing alternatives found for minor applications, regulations can afford to prohibit further animal testing for cosmetic purposes - to rid our guilt for those poor animals who didn’t give their consent just so we can be safe and pretty.
Now, the natural goodness brands lurv this! 
It will embrace this “no animal testing” ban to the hilt and announce themselves “cruelty free” to endear themselves more to consumers. 
Such a good marketing advantage against the scientific brands! And it doesn’t cost much too- just need to draw a cute little rabbit and stick it on the label.
And yes, for the record, they are already sitting on a wealth of animal tested ingredients as they draw that cute little bunny. 

4. But for “innovation driven” brands, this regulation is sort of - pardon my french - a real f*cker.
You see, for new ingredients and real breakthrough innovations, animal testing is still needed. But heck, they only allow this  for medicine and not for cosmetics. 
Hmmm…. What will L’Ucifer do? Let me put myself in L’Ucifer’s shoes… 
  • Maybe, I can contract the testing in the 3rd world.   Nope, that is not allowed by the EC as well. Gaah… note to self, try to secretly oppose this "no animal testing" bullshit. 
  • Or maybe, I can test on consenting humans from the third world.  Gawd, still too expensive as I still have to pay angry relatives if I accidentally kill them. And they have too many relatives, killing all of them can be messy. 
  • Or maybe, I can declare that testing is for medicine but then in fact use the result for cosmetics, like what happens for Botox. Hmm… Not a very elegant solution, lots of red tape and grease money but perhaps worth a try… 
So what will L’Ucifer do? 
Fortunately, for L'Ucifer there is always marketing to save the day! 
This strip is nicked from Scott Adams of Dilbert.
Because I couldn't have said it better than he did!


*This blog post is dedicated to the memory of my dog Barney. He loved pork barbecue as much as i do. 

NB
If you think that these bullshit revelations are a good thing to womankind, I would appreciate if you can help spread the word about this blog as it is one thing that can help it thrive.

It does not take much, just click on the share button (at the right side of the blog and at the bottom of each post)- share it on facebook, twitter, like-it on stumble upon, invite your friends to follow.  A little push of a button goes a long, long way.  

49 comments:

  1. "And yes, for the record, they are already sitting on a wealth of animal tested ingredients as they draw that cute little bunny."

    Yep, that was pretty much my understanding... And why I don't give a rip about the PETA approved labels and the cute little bunny.
    Somewhere along the line, our money funded animal testing. I wish people wouldn't delude themselves.

    But, boy, that bunny sure IS cute!

    ReplyDelete
  2. F'in LOVE Dilbert! I have opinions on the other stuff too but I'm keeping them to myself. Fab post as always! x

    ReplyDelete
  3. Hi Glietzkrieg! No ifs and buts about it- that bunny is cute!

    ReplyDelete
  4. Hi Claire, thank you!
    Hmm... got me curious what you are referring to.

    This post could have been more serious and could have tackled more issues but i have to keep it at readable length and still entertaining. Really the toughest post for me so far.

    ReplyDelete
  5. This was GREAT. I have no other useful or insightful comment to make. lol

    xoxo

    ReplyDelete
  6. love the article, entertaining read! I have just have to say that I have very recently met a 50-year old gorgeous chemist and was thinking if you would like to interview for more insights? (wink wink) :-)

    ReplyDelete
  7. "And yes, for the record, they are already sitting on a wealth of animal tested ingredients as they draw that cute little bunny."

    Which is why I roll my eyes and fight the urge to slap anyone who starts banging on piously about how they only buy "cruelty free" brands.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Awesome post =] I ask myself why there aren't any cute scientists all the time =P

    ReplyDelete
  9. "Democracy rocks. Or is that anarchy- gawd, i always get confused with the two."

    Confused? Naaaah. Things are so screwed up these days the signers of the Constitution would recoil in horror.

    Well, I don't have to worry who I piss off with my opinion so I'll just flat out say, PETA is the biggest con job run on the public since War of the Worlds. They have one purpose and one purpose only, to line their high fashion leather pocketbooks. Anyone who falls for their crap obviously has the reading and comprehension level of your average house pet. Those same pets that PETA would take away from the owners that love and care for them and throw them out in the wild to live short, miserable lives as ferals because it's more 'dignified' than being owned by a human...because you know, humans are the scourge of the earth and they should have the decency to DIE and leave the planet to survival by tooth and claw. Well, except PETA people of course. You don't see any of them lining up to remove their contaminated selves from the planet.

    And I don't own a mink, but I'm quite sure I can find a handy substitute should any PETA pawn ever be foolish enough to bother me at my meal, or any small child trying to enjoy a freaking Happy Meal within earshot of me.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Hi Vonzi!
    Thanks! One does not need to have an absolute extremist stand on certain issues- being cool- is just cool- as it suits you!

    ReplyDelete
  11. Yo Sandra-wazzup, wazzup?

    Hey Zena- Hmm, a 50 year old chemist? Do you think that is very wise?

    ReplyDelete
  12. Hi Dee- I know what you mean. Very hard sometimes to bite your tongue. I like to live and let live - but gawd it sometimes gives me chest pains. What's a civilized woman to do?

    ReplyDelete
  13. Hi Janna- hey! you haven't commented some time. Hope you had good holidays!
    Well, if i manage to coax the scientists to allow to shoot a sexy scientist calendar, I will have a vacancy for a PA, stylist. Heehee!

    ReplyDelete
  14. Yey Sandi!
    Haha- I loved that you really laid it on!
    My thoughts are the same but had to restrain waging all out war on a beauty blog, too soon- heehee.
    But yeah- if ever you need back up- give me a holler!
    Beauty with balls! Yey!

    ReplyDelete
  15. Happy Holidays to you too! Please keep me posted on that! ;]

    ReplyDelete
  16. PETA is one of my pet peeves, can ya tell? They're actually slimier then most politicians and that takes some doing. It takes a real scumbag to terrorize an innocent child and the lies they tell! Oh wait, that's part of the slime...

    ReplyDelete
  17. Hi Sandi- I found this and thought of sharing with you. It's shocking how they can talk at both sides of their mouth. How can this madness be so powerful?

    http://www.stumbleupon.com/su/AUjYr1/www.onlineschools.org/blog/peta/

    ReplyDelete
  18. This is a hard article to comment on. It gets people so fired up that a logical, mature discussion is not usually possible.

    On a totally separate note, THANK YOU SO MUCH for linking to my blog! I was SO surprised and so honored!

    ReplyDelete
  19. Thank you Rowena. So many people think PETA is about helping animals have better lives when that is so totally not at all what they are trying to do.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Another good site with hard numbers is PETAkillsanimals.com

    ReplyDelete
  21. Hello K-
    True, it is a controversial one so I try (oh gawd i really do) to give just the facts (haha-yeah right, even i do not buy that!) and respect your right to process the info and decide for yourself.
    But it is ok to express and rant and contribute facts, commenters here do have strong opinions but are also too smart to get into below the belt useless debates.
    Happy to say that I haven't had to moderate commenters (yet:-) as this blog i think just attracts the smart ones and some spammers. (hey is that me kissing your ass?)
    I think that if i would have a manifesto (which i am thinking of writing) i will borrow from the wise words of buddha- 'Doubt everything- including what i will tell you'.
    And i lurv your review of japanese products- too bad we do not get them here in Brussels. Thank you goes to you too!

    ReplyDelete
  22. Hi Sandi!

    Thanks for sharing this! I am sure the ones who think PETA is bullshit outnumber those who don't- but they also will be the ones who are too clever to march in the streets en masse.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Great and informative post!!!

    I've been giving myself this "cruelty free" issue some thinking lately too! It's not hard for one to realise that proclaiming to be "animal friendly and cruelty free etc etc" is more of a trap than anything else. Rarely do ppl take every aspect of an issue into consideration and this is a prime example.

    Btw, congrats on this blog, you definitely have my "support" too! ;)

    x

    ReplyDelete
  24. Hey, it's me again ;) I worked my way up your postings from the oldest to the newest and of course had to give my "no-to-animal-testing-"-statement before reading this post ^^ but that doesn't matter. I think I would have written the same after all.

    I just wanted to read your blog from the bottom to the top, just like I would have done normally ... I mean, in the same order as you wrote your postings ;)

    "Or maybe, I can declare that testing is for medicine but then in fact use the result for cosmetics, like what happens for Botox. Hmm… Not a very elegant solution, lots of red tape and grease money but perhaps worth a try"

    yes ... in my opinion, that is exactly what the Japanese and Norwegians do when killing the whales and seals. All for medicinal and scientific purposes ... right now they are researching the highly scientific answer on the question how many whales and baby-seals they can kill in one week.
    I think I have that from a book, it's almost a citation *g* just not sure which one ... could have been "good omens" bei neil gaiman and terry pratchett. greeeaaaat book! really. :) gets 5 stars from me ^^


    "And yes, for the record, they are already sitting on a wealth of animal tested ingredients as they draw that cute little bunny."
    yes ... very very sad, but the rabbits are dead now, so ... umm. It is very horrible, but it is done, and I would want to say "as long as you don't repeat it, you can use the data and researchings you made back then". Umm.
    So that the poor rabbits didn't die in completely vain. Argh. Of course it's vain, it's for cosmetics and creams, but ... at least with that data the scientists don't need to torture even more rabbits, is what I am thinking. Somehow. I'm confused. But it's been a really long day for me ... hrrrm.


    "It's shocking how they can talk at both sides of their mouth. How can this madness be so powerful?"

    Ah, that's an easy one :) the mad people talk both sides because they want money and power and attention from everyone, and many people want to believe the good things.

    Many people out there WANT someone to rescue those little rabbits and doggies and cats, they want to believe in something like MacGyver or Chuck Norris, someone who helps those animals and is on their side and fights against the big anonymous monster-companies.

    Some are maybe naive, some don't do research, some want the easy way ("I give a donation and those nice people will rescue those kittens from that evil labs"), some are confused when reading the peta-site and the petakillsanimals-site (which they claim is paid by the meat-industry) ... you can't really win there, because it's politics.

    And it's all a big eddy/swirl, with a hell of a lot of people and companies involved.

    It's not about the animals, they are only using the image of them to trigger emotions.
    It's the same when some guy or other is collecting donations for some poor kids in Africa, they always print the sad, poor, almost famished, but still pretty ones on the posters, so that people feel pity and get emotional and will give their money more easily.
    It's total manipulation. It's a bit like puppy-eyes *gg* can you say no? ^^

    ReplyDelete
  25. And how can this madness be so powerful ... they appeal to instincs, to in-built-reactions, to pity, to the "good human" in us and we want to be good humans, right? ...

    then there is some kind of mass phenomenon, like you can see on big rock concerts, when the crowd is surging forward and backward and the lead-singer starts jumping up and down and ten thousand people start jumping up and down ... being pro-PETA is like belonging to the boyscouts/girlscouts, is doing "the right thing", animals must be protected and rescued and so on. and isn't it nice that peta does that job. *rolls eyes*

    Right now I'm thinking of the tobacco-and-cigarette-industry and how my brother told me to watch "thank you for smoking." I think I might watch that movie tomorrow. I haven't seen it yet, but somehow I feel like it pulls the same strings ^^

    And as a last word for this posting - I have owned a hamster, a guinea-pig, 2 rabbits, 1 dog and another dog is still alive and I loved them all so much! And I love my alive doggy so much, I would do anything that is done to him, to the one who did it to him. And I wouldn't stop at a shoe or a witchdoctor ^^
    And yes, that's a bit passionate. As is love. ;)

    ReplyDelete
  26. Better to put the kibosh on ongoing testing than to just throw up hands and dismiss the whole issue, surely? Fixed cut-off dates make sense to me. I think there's a distinction between brands who are using ingredients that were animal tested historically and brands who are actively encouraging/commissioning tests at the present time. That's why I'm happier buying from Urban Decay than I am from, heh, "L'Ucifer".

    ReplyDelete
  27. This is not a comment about the issue but rather a question to ask the enlightened one.

    I have read a claim made somewhere by a certain L'Ucifer member that: "If you have a cosmetic line that sells in China, they have to be tested on animals."

    I would like to know if this is true in the sense that it is a LAW in China for the cosmetic products to be tested on animals. This is apparently her defence for L'Ucifer testing on animals,

    ReplyDelete
  28. Hey Caitylyn-
    Hmmm.... i am trying to remember my last rock concert...
    ....
    I can't. Old age sucks.

    Yes, you should definitely see "Thank You for Not Smoking". Dib on the actor.:-)

    I used to have quite a lot of dogs myself.:-) and cats. And i wish i could have one again.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Hi Sarah!
    A good position you have there. Respect.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Hello Shinwelin-Nice mask!

    Ok, I will tell you something that will break your heart. It does mine.
    In Asia, they do not care so much for animals as they do in Europe.
    I believe that faced with a choice of them or us, they choose us and it is heartbreaking. But then- how can we impose? WHo are we to impose? Will we feed them if they are starving? Give them money to treat the animals betterl? To treat themselves better? (It is a rhetorical question- btw).

    Ok, but to the issue-there is a regulation harmonization happening in Asia, been on the planning few years - that the regulations are approaching that of the European standards. It will take some time for the process to pe complete and perfect. But yes, the intention, at least in principle is there.

    ReplyDelete
  31. Ahh, nothing is ever what it seems is it? I roll my eyes at anyone who says they are vegan and all that crap, because how can you possibly know that nothing you buy/do/use didn't involve animals somewhere down the line.

    On another note, Rowena, I would TOTALLY read your manifesto.

    ReplyDelete
  32. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  33. Hi Arrianne!
    Well i simply roll my eyes to anyone who doesn't eat pork barbecue. But- that means more barbecue for me. Heehee!

    I started my manifesto- but the first line that i wrote was - doubt everything you hear including this one.
    That is NOT starting right....

    ReplyDelete
  34. It's sad that we kill helpless animals for the vanity of humanity.

    ReplyDelete
  35. Loving it. Like it or not, whether you buy cruelty-free or not, your products did benefit from animal testing. If you don't like this idea, you could always pop into your back yard, hack some plants and tree bark & throw them into a blender, and see how beautiful you look with that smeared all over your face (BTW, make sure there aren't any insects living in those plants!)

    Another thing to consider is that even in countries like the US where animal testing is not *required*, it really is. Standards are set up so that the only way a company can truly prove beyond doubt that an ingredient is safe is to test on either an animal or a human, and I don't believe human subjects are even allowed before animal testing has been done, in some areas.

    The good news is that with advances in computer modeling and stem-cells, we may actually be nearing a time when accurate testing can be done in a truly cruelty free manner.

    Until then, the fact remains that shopping under the guise of "cruelty free" is nothing more than a false sense of comfort created by clever marketing.

    ReplyDelete
  36. hey Jessica-
    Gawd, would you consider being a contributor here?
    I cannot promise that what you write will be published n its original format (oh yeah- i will be inserting profanities like hell!) but as more content is asked for than what i care to write about- perhaps i can tempt you on certain topics especially interesting to make up artists.

    ReplyDelete
  37. Hi !
    My english is not as good as I would like it to be but... (by the way, I'm French)... I would like to ask you one question (or maybe you could consider another point of view)...
    First, do you agree with the fact that humans and animals have a different DNA ???
    If your answer is no well... don't even read what follows but if your answer is yes, I go on...
    Try to ask any scientist you know but...
    Different DNA produce different biological responses...

    Take that simple example : hypothyroidism is treated with the same molecule on humans and on dogs... But dogs take a dose of medication 4 times higher than we do...
    Do you really think that testing this molecule on rats or even monkeys will give the same results ???

    Testing on animals was our only way before the 80's and now science can do much better by testing medications on human cells (artificially produced), not testing on humans but human cells... What do you think of that ?
    It's much more expensive but it's also much more efficient.

    Recently, scientists discovered a new molecule which can cure Alzheimer disease on rats... but only on rats, they don't know what this molecule can do on humans... they do not even know if it works on humans... It will takes up to ten years more to know if it works on humans.
    Do you really think that being able to treat Alzheimer on rats is useful ? Why didn't they start to test it on human brain cells ???

    I would love to have your opinion on that...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Salut Caroline! Thank you for taking the time to write your opinion.
      My brain has been parked for some time and cannot give you a well thought out answer that you deserve. But I will write another article in the near future which I hope can answer these missing pieces. In any case, I salute you for giving this issue that due thought process that it deserves.
      Cheers!

      Delete
  38. awesome article... keep on writing

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks Pork barbecue! From your name alone, i love you already!

      Delete
  39. Replies
    1. Thank you and i will- in due time i will resume blogging. Cheers!

      Delete
  40. I appreciate your perspective Rowena. I think it's important to note that not all cruelty-free cosmetics users are vegan (I am not vegetarian or vegan - and I love pork barbecue). And there is a distinction between testing on animals to find cures for diseases and testing on animals to make a new cream that makes your Aunt Frieda's skin less saggy (yeah right).

    I would also point out that people who use cruelty free beauty products generally understand that testing on ingredients has been done at some point in history. That doesn't mean much at this point because there's nothing that can be done about it either way.

    And does anyone really think the big brands are testing on animals for your safety? C'mon - you guys know better. They are testing on animals to avoid lawsuits. The same idiots who sue for spilling hot coffee on their own laps will sue because they got shampoo in their eyes. And if the brands can say - well we tested it and only 30% of the rabbits lost their vision or died (I'm making this number up), then we did our due diligence and we're not paying a dime.

    So bottom line - I will continue to promote cruelty free beauty products. I get attacked sometimes because I'm not vegan. Well, everyone has their line in the sand that they will not cross. I have mine and I would never proselytize my way of thinking - all of my friends know that. If they want to buy Cover Girl (animal testing giant), go for it. I'll probably let them know that Too Faced has better mascara anyway (and they're cruelty free), but I would never judge. I'm only here to provide information.

    Cheers!
    Jen from www.mybeautybunny.com

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I couldn't have said it better! Thank you for sharing your thoughts here Jen!

      Delete
  41. Just as Jen noted, I think it's important to mention that not all cruelty free cosmetics are vegan (meaning no animal testing and no animal ingredients). As a vegan beauty blogger, this distinction is really important to me. A company could be cruelty free, but I'm not buying products that contain animal ingredients because I do my best to avoid contributing to any animal cruelty process.

    I also agree that the majority of people using cruelty free cosmetics know that the ingredient has been tested at one point. However, there's a huge difference between testing once in the past and currently testing ingredients or products when it's not necessary.

    There's absolutely no reason, besides global markets that require animal testing by law, for companies to test the majority of ingredients or products on animals. They are doing it simply to make money. It has nothing to do with anything else. Their excuse of saying that they test when required by law but are working towards ending animal testing is simply PR gloss and is meant to pull the wool over people's eyes.

    I think it's important that everyone be an educated consumer. Everyone has a right be informed and understand the practices going into items that they use, consume and purchase. I don't believe everything endorsed by organizations like PETA or Leaping Bunny and I don't believe that anyone should blindly believe any organization either. I do my own research and push for my own answers and company responses. I don't want to promote something I don't agree with and am not educated about. I choose to live as much of a cruelty free lifestyle as I possibly can and my blog reflects this. What's right for me isn't right for everyone, and that's okay. However, my choice for myself is no more right or wrong than anyone else's choice for their own lifestyle.

    - Tashina
    http://logicalharmony.net

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hi Tashina- thank you for sharing such interesting insights here! It will be interesting to hear your point of view regularly here! Cheers!

      Delete
  42. Honestly this is a good blog, you were bluntly honest which is good. As for me, I like to use "crualty free" products because it makes me feel better about wanting to look good, does that mean I'm giving up meat or my leather jacket? no, in both cases the cow was already dead, and therefore didn't suffer. So I agree with you when it come to the whole mink jacket thing haha. Any way, before I get to off topic, I know that the ingreadients in my products were tested at some point, as long as they aren't being used for cosmetic testing any more, then I'm good. The brands that are crualty free use products that aren't being tested on animals anymore, wich makes me feel better about wanting to look good. I just don't think that animals should suffer ANYMORE for vanity, there are thousands of different makeup brands, how many more do we need? If vanity is that important then why not test on people. They pay people to test new pills, and I'm sure that a pill can kill some alot easier then a cosmetic product. so as long as the person is willing and signs a contract saying that science can't be blamed for their stupidity, then whats the harm? So what if a few extra hundred has to get forked out for vanity, if it's as important as wee all think, then what the hell, why not go for it?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dear Chelsea,
      I do not do this often in my blog as i want to present both sides of the coin without bias, though it may seem that i am biased in some posts due to my advanced level of sarcasm(and modest too)- but except for that testing on people idea you have (heehee), i share with you the same ideals.

      Delete