Satire On Cosmetics

Cosmetics are bought, sold, and used every day in all areas of the world. They are a part of people’s every day personal hygiene, part of their routine before they leave the house. Cosmetics change the way people look, help them feel that they are good enough to go out into the world and be seen by people. They are believed to be essential, but this comes at a cost. The cost is often times the life of an animal. A poor innocent animal that has to be used to make sure these products are safe for people. Cosmetics’ testing on animals has developed into a world-wide problem as the demand has grown for these products, therefore causing the production of new and old products to increase. Cosmetics’ testing is a very broad term that included not
Animal testing is morally wrong because of the pain inflicted on innocent creatures. There are two basic arguments that are typically presented in concern to animal testing. Most people who oppose it tend to go towards the animal welfare side of it and say that it is torturous to put animals through this, while the other side of the argument is that without these techniques products would not be thoroughly tested before being put on the market. So, it is harmful to animals, but beneficial for people (Ormandy 2). People can try and say that these tests are benefitting us by protecting us from potentially harmful products, but that is not worth harming and animal for it. Every year over 300,000 animals die from harsh lab conditions, and over 12 million are used in tests in the European Union alone (EU Animal Testing) (Fact Sheet). The tests that many animals endure and long and painful, often resulting in death or injury. Rabbits are often used in tests for skin or eye irritation where chemicals are rubbed onto their skin or dripped into their eyes causing rashes to form or making them go blind many times. Lethal dose tests are also used where animals are forced to swallow large amounts of chemicals to determine how much will cause death. Force-feeding tests are conducted over months or weeks to search for sign of general illness or other problems such as cancer or birth
It has been proven that many characteristics of a person can affect their view towards this issue. Younger people tend to be more against the use of animals, while older people tend to see the value in these tests and research so they support it. Gender also affects people. It has been shown that women tend to be more against animal testing than men. Women tend to believe that animals have more of a mental state and that this harmful testing affects them mentally as well as physically. Men however are less sympathetic than women in general towards animals lessening their support against this issue (Ormandy 3). Living conditions also change people’s views. People who live in a more rural setting tend to support animal testing or research because they realize that animals are supposed to be used to benefit us. They have close contact with animals, which makes them see the importance of animal use in these areas. People in a more urban setting are opposed to it because they have less contact or different kinds of relationships with animals. They see animals strictly as companions as opposed to a product of some kind (Ormandy 4). Experiences, religion, and personality all affect how people feel about animal testing. Often time’s pet owners are more against it than non-pet owners. If someone is