A Year Without "Made in China" by Sara Bongiorni

Cross-posted to my reading blog, Seven Apples.

The title of A Year Without "Made in China" is pretty self-explanatory. It's a chronicle of Sara Bongiorni's attempt to live without products made in China.I can't remember where I heard about this book, but when I found out that the library had a copy of it, I was fairly excited to read it. I wanted to like it. I absolutely love reading about someone who has drawn an ethical or moral line in the sand and their experiences with it. A couple of examples off the top of my head are A Plastic-free Life and The Zero Waste Home. Unfortunately, I didn't like it.

The opening paragraphs give a pretty good idea of the tone of the entire book.

We kick China out of the house on a dark Monday, two days after Christmas, while the children are asleep upstairs. I don't mean the country, of course, but pieces of plastic, cotton, and metal stamped with the words Made in China. We keep the bits of China that we already have but we stop bringing in any more.

The eviction is no fault of China's. It has coated our lives with a cheerful veneer of cheap toys, gadgets, and shoes. Sometimes I worry about lost American jobs or nasty reports of human rights abuses, but price has trumped virtue at our house. We couldn't resist what China was selling. But on this dark afternoon, a creeping unease washes over me as I sit on the sofa and survey the gloomy wreckage of the holiday. It seems impossible to have missed it before, yet it isn't until now that i notice an irrefutable fact. China is taking over the place.

Bongiorni primarily viewed as an experiment or a game. In fact, she sold it to her husband as a reverse scavenger hunt and put a lot of focus into creating rules (such as allowing gifts that were made in China). Later, she used those rules to technically adhere to the boycott while getting what she needed (like encouraging her husband's sister to buy an inflatable pool as a birthday gift for her husband when she is unable to find an inflatable pool that wasn't made in China). A few times, she made references to globalization and the fact that so many things were made in China that we were fast approaching the point that we no longer had a choice in whether to buy Chinese goods. In fact, in some areas, we don't have a choice now. Early in the book, when she was shopping for a new lamp, she found out that light switches are no longer made in the US. The subject of toys comes up frequently, since she has younger children, and she was only able to find a handful of toys (mainly Legos) that weren't made in China.

Unfortunately, aside from a few "China is too big" references in the book, she never really gave a well-reasoned argument for boycotting China, despite the fact that it's pretty easy to make a strong argument. China has a horrible record of human rights violations in factories (Foxconn, anyone?) and they're very lax on environmental issues. There's also the animal cruelty issues. In fact, I avoid fake fur and fake sheepskin (for instance, Ugg knockoffs) due to the fact that both are often made from animal fur (dog in the case of fake fur and raccoon doss for the Uggs and the slaughter process is poorly regulated and incredibly inhumane. (I'm not providing links because I don't feel like digging through the stories, but if you want to research the issue on your own, be warned that it's very disturbing.) Bongiorni doesn't really consider any of that, though, and the best explanation she gives is when she tells her son that it wasn't that they don't like China, but China was too big and they wanted to give someone else a chance to make things. Not surprisingly, given her reasons for the boycott, she had no problem with buying products made in countries with equally horrible working conditions as long as the products weren't made in China.

I was also disappointed with how she handled the issue with her family. She spends a lot of time in what strikes me as a power struggle with her husband, clinging to the idea that they must boycott China at any costs. Early on in the book, her husband loses his sunglasses and, despite the fact that he was supposed to wear sunglasses due to a growth on his eye, she pushes him to do without and, later, comes up with ridiculous and ineffective solutions to keep him from buying new sunglasses since American or Italian sunglasses were too expensive and the cheaper options were all made in China. This continues throughout the book and, frankly, it doesn't make either of them look good.

The way she handled it with her children was also a problem for me. She doesn't really make an attempt to change their values or really give them reasons to boycott China (though her daughter was probably too young to understand anyway). This means that her son develops what seems to be a hatred of the Chinese, saying at one point that he was glad people were hungry because they were bad. Bongiorni spends a lot of time worrying that the experiment had made her children xenophobic. I couldn't understand why she just didn't say "We like the people of China, but the people that make things in China make the people work in bad conditions, so we don't want to support them" or some variation of that. I can't find remember her son's exact age, but I remember understanding that sweatshops were a bad thing and that buying products made there was bad even when I was pretty young. I also found it interesting that, while she was pretty quick to deny things her husband needed (sunglasses and, arguably, flip flops for the beach), she decided that her son was suffering, yes, suffering for not being able to buy Chinese made toys.

Finally, I was annoyed at her lack of balance. One thing I struggle with is balancing various concerns, like buying a plastic free product vs a cruelty free product or choosing organic produce with plastic packaging (it happens more than you'd think) or plastic free conventional produce. Bongiorni, however, placed "not made in China" above all else. When she had mice, she had to choose between a Chinese humane trap or an American snap trap. After completely avoiding the issue and letting mice run rampant in her house, she chose the American snap trap. If she were boycotting for human rights reasons, I could understand her logic. But since it was just "China is too big," then why buy snap traps and kill mice when you'd prefer humane traps?

The writing style was that of a good blogger, if that. In fact, I think the book might have been better if she had kept a blog first and then condensed it into a book. That seems to be a very effective method in writing books like this, based on what I've seen in other books. I read the book in an afternoon and spent the entire time hoping it would magically improve. It didn't.

On the plus side, I suppose I learned a couple of things. Or, more accurately, it confirmed what I already knew or should have realized with a little thought. Chinese-made products dominate the market, especially in certain areas, and it's hard to avoid them. It's also positive to live without them, though it doesn't seem to be a long term solution to the problem. It was a good reminder to be more thoughtful about the products I buy, though, and I think that country of origin will be a larger factor in my choices. It's also encouraged me to read up on globalization a bit more.

This book counts toward the Support Your Local Library Reading Challenge.

Snack Bags Part Two

I'm a big fan of the new 4 Rs: refuse, reduce, reuse, recycle. It's important to add that fourth R since I think that a lot of people are conditioned to take whatever is handed to them without really thinking about it. Or, if they think about it, they don't want to be that person. And I think that there are a lot of times where you shouldn't be that person, especially if it means doing things intended to "send a message" to companies which basically involve being a jerk to front line employees so that, hopefully, the people who make the policies will eventually get it. (One example was someone that suggested that if an item had excess packaging, shoppers should take the packaging out of the item and leave it on the counter so that the companies will "get the message." And so that already stressed out retail employees will have the joy of having to clear off the counter while angry customers look on. Good sentiment, bad execution.)

But I digress...

One of the ways I try to be environmentally friendly is by reducing one use items whenever possible. Reusable cups are a no-brainer, obviously, but I'm also trying to get in the habit of using reusable plastic snack bags at places like Starbucks or Panera.

Panera has been great with it, though I admit that I usually just order pastries "for here" so that I get them on a plate and shove them in my bags. Starbucks has been less so. The first time, I was told it was a health code violation. The second time was great, because not only was the barista cool with putting the pastries in the bags, but she also asked about them because she'd been looking at them.

The most recent time was the most bizarre, though. I ordered pastries and I asked if the barista could just hand them to me, since I had reusable snack bags. She paused for a minute and said "Oh, no, these are really sticky and they'll get your bags dirty, so I'll just put them in a paper pastry bag."

I'm a little ashamed to admit that I didn't want to make a scene, so I just took the paper bags. Still, this really proves to me why it's important to use make it a point to use reusable products whenever possible. It's important to use fewer single use items, but it's even more to normalize the behavior. I hope that, sometime in the future, we'll reach a point where at least half of the population consistently refuses single use items.

Reusable Snack Bags Can Kill...or Something

Apparently, placing a piece of bread in a reusable snack bag is so dangerous that the health code prohibits it...at least according to a barista at Starbucks. But I'm getting ahead of myself...

One of my biggest goals is to reduce the amount of waste I produce by using reusable products whenever possible. Sometimes it's a pretty big no brainer, like using a reusable mug or grocery bags. The added bonus to doing the obvious is that other people have thought of it, too, so while a cashier may occasionally look askance when I hand them reusable grocery bags, it's usually old hat by now.

The problem is that the obvious only gets you so far and sometimes it involves going outside your comfort zone. It also means that you risk feeling judged by the people around you or, even worse, being yelled at for not following the rules exactly. My baby steps of using produce and then muslin at Whole Foods worked out pretty well, so I started to gain confidence and look for other options.

The solution came when I had to clean out my car this weekend. I travel a lot and I stop at Starbucks pretty often. While I've been trying to cut down on snacks there for various reasons (mainly the added expense for mediocre food), I'm not doing a great job at it, due to both habit and poor planning when it comes to meals. Since someone is usually in the car with me and wants a snack as well, a lot of the trash in my car came from Starbucks snack bags. Trying to find a reusable alternative to a paper bag seemed like a logical next step. After a little checking, I found this reusable snack bag that looked like a perfect size and also had penguins.

Today, I decided to use my reusable snack bag at Starbucks. It didn't seem like much of an issue, since it would involve the approximately the same amount of effort on the part of the barista as a paper bag would. Because of this, I expected at the most a bit of surprise.

I did not, however, expect the barista to politely but firmly inform me that she couldn't put my pumpkin loaf in my reusable snack bag because of health regulations.

I suppose it's possible that there is a regulation that prevents... I don't know, restaurants from serving customers in dishes provided by the customer. It doesn't make a lot of sense, since apparently reusable cups are allowed and most of the arguments for not using a reusable bag would apply to not using a reusable cup, like the bag not being properly cleaned (according to the health code). I can't find a copy of the relevant health code online, so I can't verify this.

It's also possible that it wasn't actually prohibited by the code, but that the barista had an incorrect understanding of this. Personally, I didn't feel like arguing, so I took the paper bag and left.

I do find this frustrating, though. It's either a case of health regulations being over the top or bad policy on the part of the company. Either way, it's convinced me to work hard at phasing out all Starbucks snacks, especially since I know for a fact that a lot of them come with a lot of packaging. And hey, I've got a nice little penguin snack bag just waiting for a purpose in life.

On another note, while researching, I did find an interesting video on ways to cut down fast food waste.

The Enviromentals (Episode 2) How to Reduce Your Fast Food Trash from Hal Brindley on Vimeo.

My Laundry List

When it comes to lifestyle changes, one of the most frequent pieces of advice I see is to avoid making overly broad and unclear goals. So things like "I want to lose weight" or "I want to be more fit" or "I want to spend less money" are pretty much recipes for failure unless you narrow them down. That's how I feel about my current plan. My goals are to use fewer products tested on animals and to try to minimize my effect on the environment. Oh, and being more socially responsible when I shop. In addition to being hard to quantify, they also run up against each other pretty often. If I have to choose, do I choose the option that's cruelty free, more environmentally friendly, or more socially responsible?

Right now, I'm making gradual changes and taking my time to research options. Since I tend to stockpile health and beauty products, I haven't had to make many decisions when it comes to cosmetics and I've found several good options when I am ready to buy new products.

Laundry, on the other hand, has been a problem. I do laundry regularly and I've gone through most of my laundry supplies. It's been further complicated by the fact that I've had a hard time finding options. I had been using Mrs. Meyer's laundry detergent, but when I checked Leaping Bunny, I found out that it's owned by a non-cruelty free company. I'm not happy about that, so I've switched to Seventh Generation, which seems to work well so far.

Fabric softener has been an even bigger headache. I had been using Downy, which is made by Procter & Gamble, which is most definitely not a cruelty free company. None of the local stores seem to carry any cruelty free fabric softener, so my options are either use Amazon (which has some good prices but usually only sells multi-pack products) or check stores in other areas. I've been putting it off, thinking I had several bottles of Downy left from when I stocked up during a sale, but I was apparently mistaken and ran out of fabric softener after I started to wash a load of clothes late at night.

After debating my options, I decided to try white vinegar, which was recommended by several sources. Most of the sources recommended one cup per load, but my fabric softener dispenser only held about half a cup, so that was what I used. For most of the laundry, I couldn't notice a difference between vinegar and fabric softener. There was no static, the clothes felt soft, and there was no vinegar smell. The one downside was that the towels weren't as soft, so that was a letdown. I'll have to decide whether to live with less fluffy towels or compromise and find a good, natural, cruelty free fabric softener just for towels. A few sources also mentioned using baking soda in the wash cycle or mixing vinegar, baking soda, and water to make fabric softener, so that's another option.

One of my long term goals is to go to green cleaning supplies (preferably homemade), so this feels like a good first step down that path.

Boycott vs Buycott

I prefer to focus on the positive over the negative. Blame my interest in positive dog training, but I'd much rather use something positive to do encourage a behavior I want (whether it's from a person, an animal, or an entity) than using something negative to discourage a behavior I don't like. Hence my preference of a buycott over a boycott.

A lot of the companies that I want to avoid are big companies. Procter and Gamble, for instance, has an enormous advertising budget and produces a long, long list of products. Groups have been encouraging boycotts of Procter and Gamble for a long time and I know people who do avoid their products because of their animal testing policies, but it doesn't seem to affect their bottom line. Point blank, unless a lot more people decide to take a stance against Procter and Gamble products and are willing to spend a little extra money and time to find alternatives, then Procter and Gamble isn't going to change due to even a substantial minority of consumers avoiding their products.

So why bother?

The obvious answer is that everyone has to decide where to draw the line. For a lot of people, their decision to refuse to buy certain products or patronize certain businesses doesn't come from a belief that a boycott will actually make the company change. Instead, it's making about making choices that you can live with. Regardless of what everyone else does, they choose to follow their conscience when it comes to shopping. This is good and admirable and if more people did it, we might see more change.

There's a second thing to consider, though. Very often, companies that don't test on animals or that produce a green product are smaller and every little bit of business helps. Frequently, shopping is a zero-sum game since most consumers only use one toothbrush or one bottle of shampoo at a time. Buying a product from a company you don't support means that not only does that company get your money, but you're also taking money away from a company that might better match your ideals.

Furthermore, in addition to supporting these companies, there's also the matter of supporting the stores that carry the products. Unless you live in a larger city, it might be hard to find a lot of green and cruelty-free products on the shelf of your local grocery store. If you're committed to buying these products, you can check Amazon or go out of your way a bit. However, it's important to encourage local stores to carry these products because while you might be willing to go the extra mile to find the "good" products, other people probably won't be. Some of them might scan the shelves for cruelty-free or green products and buy one them if they're readily available, but others might not bother to check, instead choosing products based on packaging, price, efficacy, and other factors that don't relate to the companies stance on animal testing or green products. It doesn't matter why the consumer is buying the product, though. What matters is increasing the number of times a consumer buys a "good" product over a "bad" product, regardless of their reasoning. If the products aren't on the shelve, then the consumer won't have a chance to buy them. If a store can't sell the products, they won't be on the shelf.

While it might be tempting to focus on the negative in all of this and do everything in your power to not only avoid products from companies you disagree with, but also to encourage everyone you know to do the same, that's not the only consideration. Punishing a company like Procter and Gamble for the stance on animal testing is tempting, but it's equally important to focus on supporting a company like Seventh Generation. That's why my primary goal is to support the "good" companies instead of penalizing the bad and why I prefer buycotts to boycotts. Anything that helps increase the choices available to consumers is a great thing in my book.

Introduction

Starting (and naming) this blog was something I spent a lot of time debating. The issues I'm going to discuss and the things I want to do are rooted pretty far back in my childhood, so in a way, this has been a long time coming.

In a nutshell, I really liked Captain Planet as a child. I realized even at the time that the show was a huge oversimplification of a lot of complex issues. When a classmate bought PETA information to school, despite knowing a good portion of it was propaganda designed to cause outrage, I fell into the trap and got outraged. For a long time, I even tried to avoid using product that were tested on animals, but that didn't last long, simply due to lack of information and options at the time. Even recently, when I visited the memorial to Martha, the last passenger pigeon, I teared up a little. (In my defense, that exhibit was designed to be a tearjerker.)

Despite the fact that I'm fairly easily outraged and I want to make a difference, it usually didn't last long. I think that I'm more aware of things like animal cruelty and environmental issues than a lot of people and that I make more of an effort, but that isn't saying much. For example, I remember leaving a classroom and watching several classmates toss soda or water bottles in the trash even though they had to pass the recycling bins to get to the elevator or stairs.

I had a lot of good reasons for not doing much. First, for a long time, there was a lack of recycling in the area. A local school attempted to collect newspapers for a while, but their hours were erratic and despite trying to collect and recycle newspapers, that fell through. As I said earlier, I attempted to boycott companies that tested on animals, but didn't work since it was hard to find out which companies were the worst offenders and even then, there were some products that I had to use and finding an alternative was next to impossible. I may not want to buy a toothbrush from a company that tests on animals, but I also don't want to stop brushing, so necessity frequently won out.

I've spent the past few years being a semi-conscious consumer. I wouldn't think of buying anything from a pet shop that sold puppies. I support rescue. I recycle where I can. I've eliminated meat from my diet, though that's actually more a matter of preference than ethics. And I spend a lot of time feeling guilty for doing enough, but I push it down.

So what changed? A few weeks ago, I read a blog entry about how some beagles were given a second chance at being released from a lab. Beagles. I try to keep things in perspective. I don't agree with the PETA quotes about how a human's life is never more important than an animals. I may not like the idea of an animal suffering, but I realize the issue is extremely complicated and I know that a lot of people are alive because of animal testing. If I had to sum it up, I'd say that I can handle animal testing provided there's no reasonable alternative, that it's medically necessary, and that the animals are handled as humanely as possible. But while I realize that the issue is complicated when it's life-saving chemo drugs, I'm perfectly comfortable with saying that I absolutely oppose the idea of animals suffering so that women can have fuller eyelashes and longer wearing mascara.

After reading that, I did a bit of internet research and realized that now there are a lot of lists of cruelty-free companies and that a lot of those products were available locally and even more were available on Amazon. Plus, the prices were comparable to non-cruelty-free products in a lot of cases. It makes it a lot harder to justify using products from companies that test on animals. I continued my research and realized that a lot of the products from cruelty-free companies were also green.

To make a long story short, I don't like knowing that a lot of the choices I make are harming the planet, animals, and (in some cases) other people...especially when in a lot of cases, it's pretty easy to make a choice that does less damage. So, I'm committing to making better choices now.

I decided to start the blog not because I plan to be a shining example of how everyone should always make the hardest choices. In fact, I'm starting the blog for the exact opposite reason. I firmly believe that it's possible to be conscious of your impact on the planet and related issues without going off the deep end. I also believe that, despite the fact that some products are more expensive, it's possible to make the environmentally conscious and socially responsible choice while still sticking to a reasonable budget. In fact, I think that in some cases, it's probably significantly cheaper.

I also plan to keep track of the products I use and hopefully save a few people some research. I don't plan to get on a political soapbox in this blog or to try to guilt people into giving up meat or boycotting certain products by posting disturbing stories and photos. One thing I've noticed is that there are two types of people when it comes to these issues. The first group really doesn't care and no amount of gut wrenching photos and outrageous stories is going to change their shopping habits. The second group cares a lot and nothing is accomplished by showing them photos of suffering animals. In fact, as someone who falls into the second group, the fact that I run the risk of stumbling on websites that will haunt me for days when I search for information on cruelty-free products makes me dread looking for information and more inclined to just go on the old way and try hard not to think about it.

I don't know how this project will go, but I truly hope that I can succeed in making big changes through small steps and that I can possibly provide valuable information to other people who feel the same.