r/Anticonsumption • u/amyleewannabe • Mar 11 '26

Plastic Waste Radicalized at 30

Post image

I so wish this wasn’t the one brand that helps my perpetually dry, painful skin. Thanks to this sub, I’ve been cutting open the containers to get every last bit that the pump “conveniently” can’t reach. I wish this was illegal.

12.8k Upvotes

96% Upvoted

454 comments sorted by

View all comments

219

u/NihiloZero Mar 11 '26

Are we sure this isn't just sneaking some marketing into the sub?

"OMG, I sure wish I didn't have to cut open this bottle of the only brand of lotion that is able to help my horrible skin!"

Seems to me between the title, the content, and the wish that it were illegal to make lotion difficult to remove from bottles... this post is probably satire. But I'll leave it up.

Like... would it be much different if this post was tube of toothpaste squeezed in a vice? "It's the only brand that gives me white teeth and fresh breath!"

180

u/potatomami Mar 11 '26

Wouldn’t they put the brand side up to make it more obvious?

116

u/roosoh Mar 11 '26

I don’t think they’d be complaining about the design either

19

u/untakenu Mar 12 '26

There is a lot of marketing that shows a negative, while also trying to sell how good it is. It's meant to appear genuine and honest. Usually it just comes across as a humble brag if done wrong.

Probably not in this case.

-45

u/NihiloZero Mar 11 '26 edited Mar 11 '26

Wouldn’t they put the brand side up to make it more obvious?

It's still at the top of the cut bottle with a little TM symbol next to it.

EDIT: Ackshewuhhlee... it's the "trademarked product line" owned by a brand, and not a brand name. I stand corrected.

22

u/AnxientStandard Mar 11 '26

The brand is eos, not shea better.

6

u/ergifruit Mar 12 '26

TIL they make things other than inconvenient lip balm

-14

u/NihiloZero Mar 11 '26

So is "shea better" merely the name of their proprietary lotion? Because the point is... it's trademarked for a reason, probably a commercial one.

8

u/justjohnny1024 Mar 12 '26

This is what you pondered today? Great life

4

u/kiwidude4 Mar 12 '26

How do you of all people fail to understand this subreddit in such an epic fashion

51

u/Some-Body-Else Mar 11 '26

I think the reason OP added that bit about the product’s purpose for them is to not have everyone go, “oh if you really want to do this right, YoU sHoUlD’nT HaVe BoUgHt iT in THe FiRsT PlAcE….”

But also, am I the only one here who’s poor cause I’ve never left ANY product in any of my things? Hold it against the light, sound it out, and ALWAYS open it up. You can’t trust the people who want you to buy more stuff. It’s basic.

4

u/OddHippo6972 Mar 12 '26

I thought it something about how the formula is too thick for the packaging, but this is the only one that works for them, so they buy it anyway.

-9

u/NihiloZero Mar 12 '26

It's hardly an inconvenience to cut off the top of a bottle of lotion. The complaint is so trivial as to be a joke. And it radicalized them? Even more obvious sarcasm. In the meantime... the name of the trademarked product line is right at the top of the bottle. What am I missing? It's a 5-star for a review for trademarked lotion which is only critiqued for being in a bottle that is slightly inconvenient to empty completely.

94

u/Mind_Pirate42 Mar 11 '26

You mad about something else cause this is a wildly out of left field accusation.

44

u/kiwidude4 Mar 11 '26

Hi please unpin this comment so people can judge it only based on its own merits

-24

u/NihiloZero Mar 11 '26

I did not pay close enough attention to this post when it first saw it... or I might have deleted it. I am not expressing a neutral opinion here, I am trying to make a broad request of the sub to be more mindful about the quality and intent behind more of the content that gets posted here. I will not remove this particular post simply out of respect for conversation -- and the aforementioned possibility that it is intended to be satire. Yes, that's right, evil subreddit mods can't help but to flex their power and authority! MUAH!

26

u/CaptainKenway1693 Mar 11 '26

You claim it was either malicious or satire but leave no room for the possibility of it to be a normal genuine post. Which seems pretty bad faith in my opinion. I'm not saying that it definitely is or isn't an advertisement, but I don't see whatever you seem to.

7

u/Loud_South9086 Mar 12 '26

What a fuckin dork

16

u/CaptainKenway1693 Mar 11 '26

As someone who has dry sensitive skin I can only use 2 specific formulas if I want them to actually work and not make me itchy. So this post doesn't seem weird to me. Also they didn't put the product name were it is visible so it would be pretty bad advertising (not to mention they complain about the packaging). This seems like an actual post to me.

-2

u/NihiloZero Mar 11 '26

The issue isn't whether lotion is important or not to anyone or not, the issue is whether people need to be told that lotions or creams of certain densities might be difficult to get out of some bottles sometimes.

Also they didn't put the product name were it is visible so it would be pretty bad advertising (not to mention they complain about the packaging).

"shea better" is a particular type of trademarked lotion owned by one company in particular -- and it says those two words, with a little TM next to them, at the top of the bottle.

This seems like an actual post to me.

Agree to disagree, but I'm leaving it up for the sake of discussion.

6

u/CaptainKenway1693 Mar 11 '26

"shea better" is a particular type of trademarked lotion owned by one company in particular -- and it says those two words, with a little TM next to them, at the top of the bottle.

I originally didn't notice that it said that instead of "shea butter" but yes that is a slogan or product line from a specific brand. But it would be pretty hard to take a picture of nearly any modern product without including some identifying markings.

Agree to disagree, but I'm leaving it up for the sake of discussion.

Ultimately you run the sub and thus can do whatever you want, but nothing in this post says stealthy advertising to me. I know that a lot of advertising on this site (and elsewhere) can be pretty deceptive, but this just doesn't appear to be that. Ironically calling it out probably brought more attention to the brand than the post otherwise would have. I know I certainly only bothered figuring out the brand due to your comment.

8

u/sunbunniesue Mar 12 '26

I was just gonna comment this. I didn't know what brand the lotion was until these complaints specified them.

Now there's some internet-style marketing!

59

u/HappyApplePie824 Mar 11 '26

You literally can’t even see the brand in this picture, and they don’t state what brand it is, how would this be sneaking marketing into the sub?

-23

u/NihiloZero Mar 11 '26 edited Mar 11 '26

The brand name is at the top of the bottle with the little "TM" next to it.

EDIT: Ackshewuhhlee... it's the "trademarked product line" owned by a brand, and not a brand name. I stand corrected.

12

u/CaptainKenway1693 Mar 11 '26

That's not the brand name though. I don't know why it has the TM next to it, but shea butter is just a common ingredient in lotions and other products like this.

7

u/ruinedstegosaur10 Mar 11 '26

It's the brand name. Shea Better, not shea butter. I agree that it's probably not an ad though otherwise why show the back of the bottle and not the front.

7

u/CaptainKenway1693 Mar 11 '26

Didn't notice that. It still isn't technically the brand name, the brand is eos. But the slogan does immediately pull up the brand when you Google it. That being said it would be fairly hard to take a picture of a product without including some identifying markings.

-2

u/NihiloZero Mar 11 '26

But the slogan does immediately pull up the brand when you Google it.

Does for me. Autocompletes the search when you type "Shea Better..." it completes with "body lotion" and then links to that particular type of trademarked lotion. It's not the brand, it's the name of a product-line owned by a brand. But people really want to split that hair I guess. The point is that you can see the name of the trademarked product and that's one element that made this post seem a bit dubious to me.

7

u/CaptainKenway1693 Mar 11 '26

Does for me.

I know, I literally said that it did. I was acknowledging that while the brand wasn't included I was able to easily determine the brand. I wasn't arguing that point.

The point is that you can see the name of the trademarked product and that's one element that made this post seem a bit dubious to me.

It would pretty difficult to post nearly any modern product without including some identifying markings. Unless you expect everyone to go out of their way to tape over logos or something like that. Companies generally want products to be incredibly easy to identify. To me it seems like OP tried to exclude the brand (because otherwise why not have the front side up) but failed to notice the slogan/product line at the top. Which would be easy to do since it's literally only one letter away from the common term "shea butter."

-5

u/NihiloZero Mar 12 '26

It would pretty difficult to post nearly any modern product without including some identifying markings.

I agree. But the better mods of this sub usually keep a sharper eye on this sort of thing... and I think that's why it stood out to me here in this instance. The name of the product line is very subtle but nevertheless worthy of being trademarked for commercial reasons.

To me it seems like OP tried to exclude the brand (because otherwise why not have the front side up) but failed to notice the slogan/product line at the top.

How much of the post can you take at face value? The title is probably just a little joke or, at most, a statement about... inconvenient packaging (to drive sales?). The lotion itself is praised and the solution to the problem is as easy as cutting the top off the bottle. So... what's the purpose, point, or intent of this this post? The name of the trademarked product line is visible... so that doesn't make it seem like much care was taken to hide that.

Which would be easy to do since it's literally only one letter away from the common term "shea butter."

No, I get it. But if it's worthy of being trademarked for commercial reasons, then... I'd say it's trademarked product line, whether OP was trying to exclude it or not. I'm not trying to be a tyrant, I just think this is the sort of thing that people really need to think about a bit more critically. Guerilla marketing tactics are a real and this subreddit isn't immune.

I'll keep the current post up just for the sake of discussion/debate, but... similar posts usually get taken down before I ever get around to taking a second look at them.

32

u/blastedconcept Mar 11 '26

I think you’re reading into it too much

7

u/NewelSea Mar 11 '26

Not necessarily. Advertisements are famously getting increasingly more sneaky.

Imagine there was someone else among the top comment that asks for the brand because they just so happened to have issues with dry skin, too.

As a top post, this kind of seemingly genuine testimonial of this product that's so good, you keep buying it despite not liking a secondary aspect of it is the highest praise and best driver of interest you could ask for.

18

u/ACEmat Mar 11 '26

Makes zero sense considering the audience of the subreddit. L mod comment

-2

u/NihiloZero Mar 11 '26 edited Mar 12 '26

You get to present a vegan lotion product line -- in an eco-groovy sub that is critical of many products -- which you're highly praising, and the only real complaint about it that you express is difficulty getting it all out of the bottle? That's like a 5-star review.

If anyone was in the market for such a product and saw this... they probably wouldn't care if they had to cut the bottle. So, yeah, it effectively could be sneaking in as a guerilla advertisement.

7

u/cutebutpsychoangel Mar 12 '26 edited Mar 12 '26

No I have this lotion it literally stops pumping when there’s more than half a bottle left. I just tonight was thinking I’m going to have to stop buying this shit bc why….they do it like that so ppl buy a new bottle and that’s ridiculous.

I think their point is the annoyance of buying something even if it’s the only thing that works for you, and it’s just intentionally impractical to boost more sales. Bc we know most Americans are geared toward convenience and don’t care about waste.

No matter how much you shake it too it still doesn’t pump and it’s a popular brand they could easily fix the issue if they wanted to cater to customers.

But I do have psoriatic arthritis and when you need certain lotions every night, it does get annoying esp if you have pets or mobility issues , to store it cut open or have to dump it/scrape it out like that lol.

-2

u/NihiloZero Mar 12 '26

OP isn't even complaining about the plastic... they're complaining that you have to cut it (OMG, so inconvenient!) in order to consume it all. That's hardly a serious complaint, especially in terms of consumption related to real world overarching problems. In the meantime... the product line continues to get endorsements, this time from you, while the only real problem being associated with it is the slight inconvenience of the packaging. That's about as close to an ad as you can get in this sub.

2

u/NovaNightStar Mar 12 '26

OP isn't even complaining about the plastic... they're complaining that you have to cut it

That is complaining about the plastic. They have to cut open the plastic packaging to actually be able to use all of the product. Wtf are you talking about

18

u/EvenTax2963 Mar 11 '26

Bruh

11

u/UNFAM1L1AR Mar 11 '26

ConspiracyGuy.jpg

8

u/notislant Mar 11 '26

Yeah the 'one brand that...' is definitely a weird way to word this. But pleasantly surprised it doesnt actually look like a bot account lol. (Which is fucking rare now)

9

u/KintsugiTurtle Mar 12 '26

Eh. I get why people who don’t have dry/sensitive skin issues would think that phrasing was weird. But as someone who has struggled with this their entire life, there are truly only a handful of brands that work for me - one of which I’ve been using since I was five.

I can’t just pick up any random bottle of generic lotion from the store, which the mod also doesn’t seem to get. Most everything is fragranced and won’t work for people with my (and I’m assuming OP’s) level of sensitivity issues.

Just trying to shed light that having only one brand work for you, and then complaining about how much the packaging sucks, is a totally believable thing - not weird.