Boo-hoo, Mike! You bet I'd volunteer! And it will only cost you whatever it costs to inflict the abuse. I won't ask you to feed or water me, since you probably aren't used to doing that too much anyway. Now, the question to YOU is: "Are YOU man enough to take me on?" I dare P&G to test on the actual subjects that are expected to purchase their products. You don't have the guts. I have lived cruelty-free for many years. There are countless high quality alternatives to P&G's overpriced, abusive, offensive products.
: : As a Procter and Gamble employee, I take offense to the constant criticism of the methods used for the testing of our products. My only question to you is - Would you (or anyone opposed to this) let us test our products on you? If so, we would be more than happy to take any volunteers!!
: Sorry, devoted P&G wageslave, but I get my personal care products from companies that do not test on animals, like Tom's of Maine. The difference between cruelty-free companies and vicious outfits like P&G
: is that cruelty-free companies actually have principles besides profit at all costs. They are willing to pay a little more for non-animal tests rather than blinding and poisoning animals. P&G could become cruelty-free if it wanted to, but it would have to worship something besides the all-mighty dollar to do so. So, let's all boycott the bastards who run Proctor & Gamble.
: : --
: : McSpotlight: Moved from the McLibel room.