The strongest positioning angle
The best angle is not:
“danger”
The best angle is:
“Does this genuinely support natural behaviour and welfare?”
That is much more sophisticated.
For example:
Instead of:
“Dowel perches are bad.”
You say:
“We prioritise varied textures and diameters because parrots naturally move across irregular surfaces in the wild.”
Then:
“For this reason, you generally won’t find uniform smooth dowel perches at Pitopi.”
This feels:
rational
educational
credible
less combative

The page format that would work best
A very clean “Rejected / Preferred” structure.
Example:

Uniform Dowel Perches
Why we usually avoid them
Limited variation in grip
Encourages repetitive foot positioning
Less opportunity for natural foot movement
What we prefer instead
Natural branch variation
Mixed diameters
Textural diversity
More dynamic climbing surfaces

Artificially Coloured Treats
Why we usually avoid them
Visual appeal often prioritised over ingredient quality
Colours can mask low-value formulations
Birds do not need visually bright food in the same way humans are attracted to it
What we prefer instead
Ingredient-led enrichment
Natural textures
Functional variety
Foraging engagement

This approach avoids sounding hysterical.

Another excellent angle: “trade-offs”
This instantly makes you sound more trustworthy.
Example:
Coconut Shell Hides
Why some birds enjoy them
Enclosed spaces can feel secure
Encourages exploration
Why we use them carefully
Can encourage nesting behaviour in some parrots
May increase hormonal behaviour depending on species and individual
This nuance is extremely powerful for credibility.

You can make it visually memorable
You already have strong branding opportunities.
Ideas:
“Approved / Not Approved” stamp system
“Earned a Place at Pitopi”
“Rejected During Testing”
“Looks Nice, But…” sections
“Good intention, poor enrichment value”
“More decoration than enrichment”
This style fits your slightly bold, Oatly-inspired tone.

One important warning
Do not make the page too large initially.
If you list:
100 rejected things
many controversial topics
nuanced care debates
…you risk:
exhausting readers
attracting arguments
creating unnecessary enemies
sounding obsessive
Start with maybe:
8 to 15 carefully chosen examples
Focus on:
obvious philosophy differences
clear welfare logic
strong educational value

This page also has huge content potential
Each section can later become:
Instagram posts
email content
reels
educational carousels
comparison graphics
“Why we chose this instead” posts
It is a content engine, not just a static page.