Essay Sample on Unethical Consumerism

Unethical consumerism dominates our day-to-day economy; whether that be food, cosmetics, or entertainment. However, ethical consumerism takes a dark turn concerning the well-being of animals. This prompts the question- how has the selfishness and gluttony of big corporations blinded society from their morals? Tens of thousands of domesticated animals are sold in pet stores around the globe. Although, most individuals tend to leave the emporium with insufficient needs for their pets, due to a lack of education or carelessness. With these inadequate pet owners, comes uninhabitable conditions for the animals- specifically their cages. Small animals such as hamsters, fish, and mice cannot fend for themselves because they cannot verbally communicate. Hence, pet stores sell “homes” for animals that are equally as comfortable as a white padded cell for humans. Unfortunately, big corporations use the fact that these animals cannot fend for themselves to benefit them. Selling uninhabitable cages for helpless animals vendors to inadequate owners and promotes unethical consumerism within big corporations. 

Speciesism is the catalyst for unethical consumerism. Speciesism as defined in Cambridge University's, The Meaning of Speciesism and the Forms of Animal Suffering: Behavioral and Brain Sciences is, “the exploitation of animals due to the human superiority complex.” William Paley who helped write the Cambridge Core article enumerates how humans are no better than animals since we too were once docile animals. Paley discusses how homo sapiens should respect small animals and how “...being deprived of the commodity matters to the animal as much as does food deprivation.” He continues to stress that our high morality complex has allowed us to heartlessly “practice [the] killing animals to eat them caus[ing] them pain and death for our pleasure and convenience [when] eating meat was unnecessary.” Additionally, pet owners often neglect how the needs of the small animals can greatly affect not only their spaciousness but their overall health. Paley argues that “[i]n designing environments for animals in zoos, farms, and laboratories, priority should be given to providing commodities and behavioural opportunities for which the animal's behavior reflects inelastic demand.” One can not dismiss the necessities of a species solely because they can not speak up for themselves; when ironically, owners are supposed to be their voice. It is an owner's job to protect and care for their pet. Unofrtuenaltey, some do not take into account just how much space, food, and companionship a small animal needs because of illogical preconceived narratives that since they are so small, they do not need that much care. However, it is quite the contrary. As humans, we collectively view ourselves as superior to other animals; and Paley shows just how easy it is to feed into evolution's instinctual power imbalance. This ideal particularizes that owning a smaller meeker pet may feed into an unethical superiority complex, and make one view their pet as lesser than. Now, since the biological terminology has been specified, what pushes one to feed into this toxic mindset?

False advertising claims to sell safe and ready-built cages to consumers. Companies will advertise an aesthetically pleasing cage to consumers so they will purchase their item. However, most times, these cages are not genuinely suitable for life. Maggie Coffey and Riley Gaunt from Breaking Blue write about how uninhabitable homes for hamsters and mice are extremely common and being sold in pet stores worldwide. A plethora of cages are not suitable for life yet, “[p]et stores continue to feed the misconception of certain animals [such as]…selling food with not enough variety, incorrect nutrition values, and an unhealthy amount of sugar. These types of foods can cause malnutrition and can also make animals more prone to illnesses.” The article sheds light on how these small cages that are not fit for animal life are marketed as fun-loving homes. Moreover, there is an ideology that “[b]uying a pet to ‘save them’ from these conditions just feeds the supply for these animals” consequently prompting unethical consumerism within big corporations. The big businesses advertise flashy cages that the owners find appealing yet “forget” to mention that these cages are not tolerable conditions for the survival of the pet, let alone a comfortable home. Feeding into the ‘buying a pet to save them’ only ensures the supply and demand that dominate pet stores. Although, there are no changes that can be made to the selling of uninhabitable homes unless we make it law binding. 

Animal mill legalization contributes to unethical consumerism. Patrick O’Connor’s article discusses why legislation is needed in order to ban animal mills ranging from cats, to dogs, to rabbits and that, “mills are a socially unacceptable business model[s] and…businesses need to take responsibility for exploiting voiceless animals.” (Banning the Retail Sale of Cats, Dogs, and Rabbits in Pet Shops). It is no secret that the pet industry is a booming business, and many individuals want to get their fair share of the benefits. Therefore, there has been a boom of mills in the United States since 2015. Unfortunately, the regulation of those who own animal mills are fairly loose and have not been updated in years. According to the American Pet Products Association data states that in 2018 $90.5 billion dollars was spent on pet industry expenditures. That amount increased in 2019 to $97.1 billion dollars, and again in 2020 to $103.6 billion. Retail businesses and pet stores often choose to ignore the cruelty at mills because it benefits their demand. Face it. when supply meets demand, the companies are happy. Business is cutthroat, and sometimes they do not care how they get their money- they simply just want the funds to continue their operations. Putting laws in place would allow for these unethical business practices to be at a standstill. Tens of thousands of breeders are in the business for money and only money. Many do not care about the whereabouts of the animals post-auction. Therefore, restricting laws on animals mills will directly stop the outdated principle of  ‘buying a pet to save them’ and disintegrate the exploitation of animals by money-hungry businesses. 

Children should be educated on the animals that they are receiving from their parents. Patty Born in her abstract, “Regarding Animals: A Perspective on the Importance of Animals in Early Childhood Environmental Education '' discusses how these children oftentimes are not given the proper instructions to care for small animals. Although these pets may be adorable, they are not stuffed animals. Born underlines that “learning ‘with’ animals would mean spending time outdoors in search of animals or animal homes, but doing so ethically and responsibly, acknowledging the importance of animals’ own agency in creating their homes, rather than viewing animal homes as “ours to learn from.” Children typically lack the critical understanding that these are real pets with very real needs such as food and water. Borns's article particularizes how. Parents need to teach their children that when giving them a pet “they are not “tools for investigation” or “helpers in the classroom,” they are instead partners and “others” in a child’s experience, living beings who have agency and freedom.” Bron emphasizes the responsibilities that come with these animals; and if a child is not properly educated on how they should take care of them, then they should not obtain it. It stresses that although this animal cannot speak for itself, it still has emotions and well-being that needs to be taken care of. 

Animals need to stop being used for experiments.  Sir Bob Hepple goes into depth in his book The Ethics of Research Involving Animals. This book goes in-depth on the ethics of animals in research studies; and details how animals are constantly used as a form of research without taking into consideration that these are creatures that endure pain and obtain emotions. Hepple argues that “ all approaches based on violence and intimidation are morally wrong.”  It continues by stating that these animals are self-sufficient; hence, why they were capable of evolving in our modern-day environment. Hepple argues that those who conduct these experiments “acknowledge that animals are currently subjected to experiments and believe that they need protection. While they continue to advocate that the recommendations should go further in specific areas, they accept them as steps in the right direction, without endorsing research involving animals in principle.” According to the United States government statistics in 2019 animal testing of guinea pigs, hamsters, and rabbits was at an all-time high. Animal testing has only increased over the years and is bound to be used more as technology advances. It is crucial that we start to put laws in place now that would prevent animals from being tested in the future that these animals are not just pets; and that individuals need to treat them with respect whilst not seeing them as fore-bearing and submissive organisms. 

Big corporations need to take accountability for the damage they have done. We have become blinded by false advertising and have indulged in appliances that are not suitable for our lovely pets. Animals all around the world are constantly mistreated and although mishandling and abuse are inevitable; there is still a chance that we can decrease manhandling. Be a voice for the voiceless animals for they can not speak up.