# Lush supporting the hunt sabs association



## Clare85 (12 December 2014)

I don't currently hunt as I don't have an available horse so those of you already on the scene may well be aware that Lush (the bath smellies shop) has Hunt Saboteurs Association banners up in their shop windows. I believe they are donating some profits to the sabs. I haven't bought much from them in the past (as the overpowering sickly sweet smell from their shops puts me off) and I certainly won't be at all going forward. Just thought I would post for anyone not in the know so they can boycott if they so wish. Apologies if this is a well known fact already - like I said, I'm not on the hunt scene currently.


----------



## Clare85 (12 December 2014)

Just googled and seen that Lush have been supporting them for years, so everyone is probably already aware. Apologies for pointless thread


----------



## Swirlymurphy (12 December 2014)

It's not pointless at all.  It's a shame as I have always liked some of their products but since finding out a few years ago that they were so anti-hunting, I have never bought anything from them again.  I even went into a shop and told them why I wouldn't be buying any of their stuff.  I got laughed out of the shop but was happy to have stood up for hunting in my own small way.

It's always worth reminding people where their money goes


----------



## webble (12 December 2014)

This is a bizarre thread for me because I have just popped over from another forum I am on promote who Lush because they are anti testing/ anti hunting/ anti cruely


----------



## Clare85 (12 December 2014)

I'm all for anti-cruelty webble, but for Lush to support the sabs is not on imo. As I understand things they cause huge issues and put horses and riders in danger, sometimes even small children on their ponies. Peaceful protest is obviously the right of all and if people don't agree with hunting then that's their prerogative. However, imo, much of the time the sabs are not country folk and they willfully cause danger to others in protest of something they don't fully understand.


----------



## MerrySherryRider (12 December 2014)

Non news really. As an anti animal testing and anti animal cruelty company, they have supported the Animal Welfare Act legislation for years. From a commercial perspective, having anti hunting banners in the windows must be good for attracting business otherwise they'd have stopped years ago.

From a personal point of view, I don't like the products and am always slightly curious as to why they're so popular.


----------



## MileAMinute (12 December 2014)

Clare85 said:



			I'm all for anti-cruelty webble, but for Lush to support the sabs is not on imo. As I understand things they cause huge issues and put horses and riders in danger, sometimes even small children on their ponies. Peaceful protest is obviously the right of all and if people don't agree with hunting then that's their prerogative. However, imo, much of the time the sabs are not country folk and they willfully cause danger to others in protest of something they don't fully understand.
		
Click to expand...

Hear hear. 

FWIW, I can't stick Lush products anyway - they stink and are overpriced for what they are. Never understood the appeal.


----------



## WindyStacks (12 December 2014)

I used to spend ~£50/month in Lush. Then when they started supporting sabs about 6 years ago I went cold turkey. In fact all their causes are quite insane. 

Shame as their fresh face masks can't be beaten.


----------



## marianne1981 (12 December 2014)

I started going in there BECAUSE of them being anti hunting. I wouldnt be surprised if the Bodyshop was the same but not so vocal about it.


----------



## VoR (12 December 2014)

Tricky one this, there are posts on this forum castigating Sabs for trying to stop businesses supporting hunting, a cause many of us and those businesses support,so we would be a bit hypocritical to promote a boycott of this company because they decide to support a cause they believe in.


----------



## MiJodsR2BlinkinTite (12 December 2014)

There's something in me that resents the implication from Lush and other companies who support "non-cruelty" products - that we of the hunting field are all animal abusers who love to see animals being tortured in some laboratory for the sake of stuff we slap on our faces and keep in the bathroom! 

That's the message that's being perpetrated if one looks at the situation.

And it simply isn't true; I'm not ashamed to support the hunt - BUT don't want the bit of lippy and splodge of eyeshadow that I slap on so as not to look like something the cat dragged in, tested on animals. The concept is not palatable to me and as a consumer I want to be given choice, i.e. animal tested -v- "cruelty free". Not that all animal testing is necessarily "cruel" as such; the animal testing and product testing industy is (supposed to be) highly regulated....... but I still don't like the idea. 

It would be interesting to know what Body Shop's credentials are in this regard. I seem to recall that when Anita Roddick sold out, it was to L'Oreal???? who were, or so I believe, one of the WORST companies for using animal testing - then suddenly when they took over the Body Shop, they went all squeaky clean???


----------



## Goldenstar (12 December 2014)

Never spend a penny there never will , one thing about me I am very very fussy where I spend my money .


----------



## bakewell (12 December 2014)

tbh if I wanted to ruin a line of scent, natural or otherwise, Lush products would probably be top of my list. The pong emanating from their stores could kill a cat.


----------



## webble (12 December 2014)

marianne1981 said:



			I started going in there BECAUSE of them being anti hunting. I wouldnt be surprised if the Bodyshop was the same but not so vocal about it.
		
Click to expand...

Hmmmm Bodyshop are owned by L'oreal who are horendous animal testers so I'm pretty sure you are safe there


----------



## Nancykitt (12 December 2014)

VoR said:



			Tricky one this, there are posts on this forum castigating Sabs for trying to stop businesses supporting hunting, a cause many of us and those businesses support,so we would be a bit hypocritical to promote a boycott of this company because they decide to support a cause they believe in.
		
Click to expand...

As others have said, there's a big difference between supporting a cause and funding morons like the sabs. 
And all people are doing, as far as I can seen, is boycotting - ie, not spending money there. The sabs do far more than boycott the pubs and businesses supporting hunting, they actually go in actively causing trouble. 
If anyone here was advocating going into Lush and causing a lot of unpleasantness then that would be something else - and something I wouldn't condone.


----------



## Kat (12 December 2014)

I could be quite happy with them being anti-cruelty and could live with them being anti hunting but supporting violent thugs like the sabs is inexcusable as well as being inconsistent with being anti-cruelty (pepper spraying hounds and horses anyone?). Further these sabs are so ill informed and driven by class warfare, my oh was recently given a hard time on Facebook by some fool involved with the sabs because he posted photos of a bloodhound meet!


----------



## dogatemysalad (12 December 2014)

It's good to hear that people boycott companies that they find ethically offensive. 
Can't stand the hypocracy of the Body Shop- unethicial on so many levels, even before Roderick sold out to the shabby Pro-Israel and animal testing cosmestic company L'Oreal.
The Body Shop suffered huge losses following the sell off due to public anger.

However, with something like 85% of the public supporting stag and fox hunting bans, I guess its shrewd business sense for Lush. The few hunt supporters that feel strongly enough to boycott the stores, make little impact on sales.


----------



## Orangehorse (13 December 2014)

KristmasKat said:



			I could be quite happy with them being anti-cruelty and could live with them being anti hunting but supporting violent thugs like the sabs is inexcusable as well as being inconsistent with being anti-cruelty (pepper spraying hounds and horses anyone?). Further these sabs are so ill informed and driven by class warfare, my oh was recently given a hard time on Facebook by some fool involved with the sabs because he posted photos of a bloodhound meet!
		
Click to expand...


I think you have hit the nail on the head!  The stink from the Lush shop is enough for me to give it a wide berth.


----------



## Alec Swan (13 December 2014)

Orangehorse said:



			I think you have hit the nail on the head!  The stink from the Lush shop is enough for me to give it a wide berth.
		
Click to expand...

It could be used to lay an ideal trail,  I'd have thought,  especially as it appears to be pink and fluffy and that it wreaks!  What hounds would think of it when they caught up with their quarry,  God alone knows!

Alec.


----------



## MotherOfChickens (13 December 2014)

bakewell said:



			tbh if I wanted to ruin a line of scent, natural or otherwise, Lush products would probably be top of my list. The pong emanating from their stores could kill a cat.
		
Click to expand...

Lush stores are a migraine trigger for me-even from down the street as I'd never go in one.


----------



## poiuytrewq (13 December 2014)

Ohh this thread has just given me the perfect excuse never to go in lush again thanks!

The daughter is obsessed with lush and we always have to visit....she's more obsessed with hunting and hating sab's though!  Happy days


----------



## Tiddlypom (13 December 2014)

Anyone else never heard of Lush before reading this thread? It'll be easy for me to boycott them, I suppose .


----------



## MerrySherryRider (13 December 2014)

I guess the dilemma in boycotting a company boils down to priorities. Lush supports with it's Charity Pot, environmental, animal and human rights charities, including protecting Whales, seals and other marine life. 
 They support the tax avoidance group, UKuncut, which campaigns against companies who avoid paying tax in the UK.
They support the UK anti fracking campaigners. 
Lush, as well as annoying the fox and stag hunting lobbyists,  have been the target of Israel lobbying groups because of their support of Oneworld, a group of musicians  who raise awarenss of poverty and human rights abuses of the citizens in Gaza and the West Bank. 

Last year their UK pre tax profits rose by 22.5 % and global sales rose by 20%. Winner of the 2014 best in business Observer Ethical Award, the company seems to be doing well, despite being a thorn in the side of the hunting and Israel lobbies.


----------



## Alec Swan (13 December 2014)

MerrySherryRider said:



			&#8230;&#8230;... Lush supports with it's Charity Pot, environmental, animal and human rights charities, including protecting Whales, seals and other marine life. 
 They support the tax avoidance group, UKuncut, which campaigns against companies who avoid paying tax in the UK.
They support the UK anti fracking campaigners. 
Lush, as well as annoying the fox and stag hunting lobbyists,  have been the target of Israel lobbying groups because of their support of Oneworld, a group of musicians  who raise awarenss of poverty and human rights abuses of the citizens in Gaza and the West Bank. 

Last year their UK pre tax profits rose by 22.5 % and global sales rose by 20%. Winner of the 2014 best in business Observer Ethical Award, the company seems to be doing well, despite being a thorn in the side of the hunting and Israel lobbies.
		
Click to expand...

Having never heard of them,  they seem to have a highly successful business,  considering the time,  effort and money that they invest in good causes.  I wonder how,  as a company,  they manage to spread themselves so thin.

Alec.


----------



## Lego (24 December 2014)

I used to get a lot of lush products and they were a family fave for stocking fillers etc...until I found out about them supporting the sabs. 

As an ethical company, I wouldn't be at all surprised if they supported animal welfare charities, but to support a group whose whole ethos is to sabotage and disrupt is wrong to me... particularly since I know of several instances where friends have been hunting legally and still threatened/intimidated/trespassed to actively sabotage by this group, even when children were present.

They can express their support-and so I express mine by refusing to use or buy any of their products, including as gifts, and explaining why to anyone that asks.


----------



## LittleRooketRider (2 January 2015)

VoR said:



			Tricky one this, there are posts on this forum castigating Sabs for trying to stop businesses supporting hunting, a cause many of us and those businesses support,so we would be a bit hypocritical to promote a boycott of this company because they decide to support a cause they believe in.
		
Click to expand...

The difference is were not going in and trashing the shops and causing a fuss, or slating them in online reviews, or making up BS about their products or the people that work there. We are just making the choice to not spend our money there. Unlike sabs who seem to have the ogic that if you hunt/you support hunts you are therefore a paedophile etc...no I'm not making this up having scrolled through a few anti fb pages "inbred" and "paedo" are regularly attached to pis of people in hunting gettup.


----------

