Turnabout’s fair play: Now the Indian cosmetics industry is targeting mattar-sexuals with a skin lightener for men.
The advert for the male cream shows a dark-skinned college boy relegated to the back seat and ignored by the girls until he uses the product. Soon enough, his complexion lightens and girls flock to him like moths to a flame…Until now, skin-lightening creams have been aimed almost exclusively at women. This is the first launched nationally for men… Called Fair and Handsome, the advertisement for the product gives the message: be fair or remain in dark oblivion…
“A look at the matrimonial section… there’s not one guy who admits to being dark and attractive, they just say we are wheatish and fair. So there is just not one dark-skinned person in this country, they are all rolling wheat fields of masculinity.” [Link]
<
p>Naomi Wolf penned an interesting polemic on this subject in The Beauty Myth. She says many cosmetics companies fund women’s mags which are largely designed to make girls feel insecure about their looks. The industry appropriates the sheen of science (white lab coats in department stores, medicalized vocabulary like ‘invisible damage to your skin’) when many of them are really peddling snake oil. The more successful they are at creating a culture of hypochondria and medicalized insecurity, the more product they move.
<
p>Many industries besides cosmetics use fear in advertising. However, it’s far more damaging when it hits women’s self-confidence instead of something more neutral like their feelings about, say, consumer appliances.
<
p>
<
p>In India, there’s a big class divide between those tanned from being out in the sun all day vs. those who work indoors. That’s in addition to the obvious association between caste and intrinsic skin shade.
In contrast, in the U.S., tan once again became a wealth marker after agriculture was mechanized. And dark skin has historically been associated with masculinity in the U.S. because of the eroticization of African slaves.
Besides, why mess with the perfection of a fellow mutineer? 
 |
| ‘Ladies, allow me to introduce myself’ |
Related posts: Bollywood delusions; Fair = Lovely and Bitiya meri gori gori by Vikrum Sequeira
The class dimension is interesting.
…makes me think of similar indicators that equate with attractiveness/sex appeal with wealth and aesthetically distance men and women from physical labour (i.e. signify that they don’t have to use their hands and feet for work, or work outdoors)
Manish & Ang, I’m sure the parental Pantone system is in full force to classify eligibles for betas and betis… thankfully I didn’t have to deal with that before I got married.
Razib, your comments are eye-opening… I’ve got to check out your blog. On my way now.
Although if brown folk in the US making color distinctions among other brown folk is silly — which I think it is — I’ve always thought it interesting that black folks used to describe each other in similar light/dark language, e.g. the “high yellows” and “reds” etc. I think by now those terms have become pretty antiquated but I’m surprised to still hear them from time to time.
Granted it’s a different history altogether, but surely the thought process and compartmentalizing that happens is very similar across both brown and black peoples.
Female fertility linked to attractiveness:
argus, you might warn people that they are pointing to potential fertility (i.e., estrogen rates correlated positively with frequency of fertilizations per copulatory event), not the reality of total fertility rate or births per woman. last i checked, fatties have a lot of kiddies, for example….
we have over looked what more important issues here such as breast and buttock size and shapes.The indian classified scene would be more complete with these info also, soon they will add presense or absense of uunt angutha also.
cameltoe? 🙂
I’ve always thought it interesting that black folks used to describe each other in similar light/dark language, e.g. the “high yellows” and “reds” etc. I think by now those terms have become pretty antiquated but I’m surprised to still hear them from time to time.
there still is a color divide amongst blacks. look at what w.e.b. dubois presented to the world as a the face of the “black” elite. but the difference with american browns is that i am skeptical there is any class correlation with skin color. browns (still) tend to skew toward more education, and my impression is that selection bias is as strong, or stronger, on modally darker skinned south indians as among medium skinned gujaratis and north indians. bangladeshis and pakistanis should cancel each other out (both are SES lower down, but at opposite ends of the color continuum). what i’m trying to say is that the black-faced dude at the temple might be a professor at MIT while the light-skinned punjabi from pakistan might be driving a taxi. or vice versa. so that dampens a lot of the tensions.
and those of us who fancy brown on white action of course live in a world where only the fetishizers note intrabrown color differences.
also, i might add, my friend john derbyshire, who used to work in financial software in NYC, once wondered if among indians there might be a positive correlation between intelligence and skin color among browns. that is, his experience was that the black boys were more adept code jockeys than their browner brethren. this was probably colored by the cresting of south indian techies in the 90s, but it makes you laugh 🙂
That stinks that he would try to look for a correlation. Like you mentioned in your previous comment, it doesn’t exist.
That stinks that he would try to look for a correlation.
i think what was going on was that they were getting a lot of south india H1bs, who were better than the mixed-group of native browns he saw in interview processes (if i recall correctly it was a middle-sized firm, so it probably couldn’t get the best of the natives, but had an easier shot with the overseas). i doubt he was looking for jack. it was a trend he spotted, at least for a little while.
the best point was that we’re all brown, i don’t think we or should escape the fact we’re desi. to me the people who think others don’t think they are desi at the end of the day, i don’t think so
What about 18) All of the above ? Does that count ?
Dude, for all we know they already have a similar algorithm, it could not be the furniture and the decor match they are looking for, but I can assure you that it is something really whacky.
About the article, I think its more accurate to describe it as estrogen =’attractiveness’= fertility not just attractiveness=fertility. Its talking about (stereo)typically feminine features (eg. jawline) linked to estrogen. I would assume estrogen = hips, belly, tits, ass as well…so this idea of “fatties”=unattractive gets a wtf!? from me. or maybe I’ve just read it all wrong.
to me the people who think others don’t think they are desi at the end of the day, i don’t think so
i think you hit a grain of truth with this. i think people say this when they think you will be happy. i look pretty dam brown, but a few ladies have told me that i don’t “look brown.” i offer to show them my dark chocolate cock and then they retract their opinion (that’s a joke). no dude has ever told me i don’t look brown, cuz i don’t think any dude has thought that it might make me like ’em more. no dude has ever told me that i’m not “really asian,” cuz alleviating the perception of asian-emasculation-syndrome isn’t a concern with dudes.
ultimately, a lot of it has to do with who the ubervolk of the day are. i remember reading some funny shit about bengalis bragging about eastern asian ancestry after the russo-japanese war (when japan kicked the shit out of russia and the white nations browned out with shock). i read this via a quote from a chitpavan brahmin who was pissed that the “black bengalis” had dropped their balls and started swaggering (no doubt this dude was pissed that his “aryan brothers” had their teeth kicked in). when our kids are learning mandarin in their cram schools i suspect browns will rediscover their “asian” heritage and cultural commonalities and no longer market their black asses as “white people with dark skins.”
Actually, it’s kind of insulting. Even if it is just that they don’t know any better.
and really who cares about tall, dark and hairy or any other possibilities… give me Smart, Funny, and Not-A-Momma’s-Boy, anyday!!!
Any guy who would spend money on fade-cream probably spends more time in the bathroom than me, and that’s a major no-no.
razib – I thought obesity was linked to infertility in different ways, for instance obesity in polycystic ovarian disease or peripheral conversion of estrogen to testosterone in fatty tissue with androgenization leading to abnormal menses, etc.
I dunno. I am laughing so hard at some of the comments. You people….
Chris Tucker: The older the berry the sweeter the juice..
Ice Cube: No, man! It’s the blacker the berry the sweeter the juice.
Chris Tucker: (pauses and thinks) yeah, well she black as a muthafucker, too…
Very good and very true. Fat does not equal fertile, by any stretch of the imagination, especially when there’s excess testosterone caused by hormone > insulin instabiities (or the metabolic syndrome which I think is a better name than polycystic). But then again, a curvy girl with full hips, and chest, and small waist (all the stuff that sometimes corresponds with estrogen) is considered fat by today’s vestern sad sad sick standards.
You must be doctor-ni? Can I give you Pant-Own test? For my brother?
I’m a dermatopathologist, so I barely count. And I probably messed up in my last comment, which is why I stay away from commenting on medical things in posts – my area is so narrow and I’ve forgotten a lot of basic things that are unrelated to my field.
Good point Ang, our definition of obesity has changed. Marilyn Monroe would be considered fat these days, and I shudder to think what our current society would have done to her beauty. She would look like all the other skeletons slinking down the catwalk. Ugh! What’s a Pant-Own test? Or should I stay away from that?
Razib: agree with you that class doesn’t factor into brown folk’s perception of skin tone — among 2nd generation diasporic desis, I’d argue. Class definitely does factor into how our parents’ and grandparents’ generations — in India and around the world — put gora-ness on a pedestal. We call it the caste system, dating back to the precolonial days of the Laws of Manu etc.
By the way, I’m not sure what troubles me more — whether the One People profile of you is hyperbole — or whether it’s even remotely true. Not meant as a personal critique of you, I’m just wondering if there’s a grain of truth in any of it.
While I’m sorry to see what this specific product implies (dark brown = bad, light brown = good), I must admit it gives me a perverse pleasure to see the increase in “beauty” products and magazines marketed at guys.
I think it’s high time that you boys have a taste of what your mothers, sisters and girlfriends have had to (and still have to) endure. It’s worse now than ever and I’m glad to see that maybe one day soon the playing field will be level and we’ll all be equally dissatified with our looks and insecure as we reach for the new and improved depillatory/skim creme/etc/etc/etc.
Whoo hoo!
The famous brown parent pantone test.
And more here.
Scary is right!
Can we get this back to ogling pictures of Naveen Andrews please?
In that spirit: 1. Ding.
and
desi nole,
hell yes it counts. in fact it’s the only honorable answer.
shades of digital underground…
peace
Shah Rukh Khan? The darkest hero to ever rule Bollywood?
“Brown Skin Lady” by Blackstar (Talib Kweli and Mos Def) is lyrically among the best verses dedicated to darker-skinned women.
lol. Interesting that in a thread about beauty ideals that put pressures on men we’re talking a lot about women’s attractiveness (my own Naveen Andrews ogling aside). Even within critiques that mock the ridiculousness of ideas about what is beautiful, its women and womenÂ’s bodies that are the subject of attention. MenÂ’s bodies/faces just aren’t sexualized and objectified the way womenÂ’s bodies are* at the moment…I’m not saying that if men faced the same daily bullshit this would be a positive development…just pointing out the differences.
Also,
Relegated to the back seat because of your dark complexion? (my irony sensors are going off at this in light of Ms. Rosa Park’s recent passing)…
*Men, of course face entirely different set of gendered pressures.
More from the Beeb link:
“wheat fields of masculinity” – nice 😉
As for the dear professor’s comments, anyone besides me wish she’d shutthef*ckup? India’s rulers have always been fair? (rhetorical, I’m not asking)
IF desis do equate fairness to superiority, isn’t it about time to get over it? And IF she’s right, then maybe someone should study India’s shallow-ness complex..
I’m just wondering if there’s a grain of truth in any of it.
there is always an undigested piece of grain in a pile of shit. just dig deep.
oh, and re: the people of size,
1) i’m talkin’ clinically obese, not chunky/chubby.
2) who cares of they die early and have a higher frequency of fertility problems? TFR for native born americans is lower than 2. fecundity is a matter of will and inclination, not biology, today.
3) the stuff i saw in that vein might be an artifact of higher obesity among minority groups with higher fertility (blacks, latinos). don’t know.
why isnt bronzer or those fake tanners this controversial
As a dark-skinned vixen myslef I’ve always been amused by my white friends with their mystic tans and sunworshipping and the once a year expirience I have of some post-vacation co-worker putting their arm against mine and saying very proudly “look I’m almost as dark as you!”. Contrast this with a cousin’s wedding I attended in SL where the make-up artist covered my face in (very noticably) lighter powder making me look like some horrid ghost in all the bloody photos. This is is not to say that the majority in North America are free of the bias towards lighter skin that characterizes desi communities (often there are also issues of fetishizing dark skin as ‘exotic’ rather than embarcing it as beautiful on its own terms)…but I digress
This is is not to say that the majority in North America are free of the bias towards lighter skin that characterizes desi communities (often there are also issues of fetishizing dark skin as ‘exotic’ rather than embarcing it as beautiful on its own terms)…but I digress
dark is OK if you are white. the bias isn’t the same as among browns at all, salient “darkness” is simply a discontinuous measure that separates white from non-white. with-white measures of darkness don’t have as negative a conotation (if at all). can you imagine a sorority girl telling her sister, “jen, you are looking dark today, don’t spend as much time out in the sun!” as opposed to: “i need to get some sun.” i hear brown people diss on others (usually ladies) by saying “too bad she’s dark,” all the time (or at least amongst my parents and in bangladesh). i have heard this amongst other asian groups, and among blacks. perhaps because my ass is brown whites don’t say this around me, but i suspect it is actually just that they don’t focus on skin color since theyz all be white. usually it’s “too bad she’s fat/skank/dumb/etc.” other dissable traits loom way larger.
now, where dark vs. non-dark matters amongst whites is hair color. a good dye job is a way that a so-so woman can climb up the pecking order, or at least turn themselves into a ‘monet.’ on the other hand, i think in some ways a woman with extremely exceptional bone structure is better being dark haired, because bright blonde hair might distract from focusing on salient facial features.
p.s. the non-white individual casting aspersions at a dark other individual is usually somehow less than stellar in personal characteristics in my experience. i.e., the wider the ass of the light-skinned chick or procine the features the more likely she will be to pull a color card out. you can generalize this further in that if individual x casts aspersions at y based on a phenotypic or group metric (i.e., “they’re dark.” “they’re cambodian.” etc. etc.), individual x is usually not an “alpha” with their own group, and are quite likely to be marginal members. a person of supreme confidence and conceit should simply say, “too bad they aren’t me.”
procine is porcine.
I am seeing a lot of blanket statement about “desi” perception of fairness and superiority. Why did I enclose the “desi” in quotes? Glad you asked.
You see, the general perception about “desis” here is quite archaic. They are being portrayed as relics from an ancient past that does not exist anymore. I do not think “desis” consider fairness as a superior trait because it somehow in some convoluted way connects to the caste system (which does not have as much relevance in educated folks living in the metro areas these days), or exposure to sunlight due to menial labor or the fact that India has been ruled by fair folks in several periods in its history.
The modern “desi” simply subscribes to the notion of attractiveness as defined by the dominant civilization of today.
As you can see, several posters craftily let it slip that they happen to be quite fair. In other words, we are all equally guilty of this obsession. If we happen to be on the right side of the spectrum, we take advantage of it, albeit as diplomatically as possible. If we are unfortunate enough to fall on the wrong side of the spectrum, we become flag bearers of the anti-colorism movement.
wrong side of the spectrum ?!?
so what “dominant civilization” has defined attractiveness for you today, argus?
Do tell, I’m all agog.
Ms Cicatrix/Anjali,
First of all let me ask you, why must you use such a horrible handle? You have a beautiful name.
Secondly, … as a matter of fact, I lost my chain of thought. But you do get the essence of what I meant, don’t you?
argus_nj,
as i have noted multiple times, the preference for faireness predates european hegemony. and, if you read on blondes, you will see there has been some variation in preference for faireness in europeans themselves (i.e., sometimes blondeness is equated with virginity, sometimes with harlotry).
you are right about people letting slip about their fairness 🙂 “i’m not kala, not that there’s anything wrong with it….”
I have to agree with Razib the atheist on this one. Yeah, I’ve definitely seen this phenomenon. Marginal members of groups do tend to pull out the color card–it totally has to do with insecurity/lack of self-confidence. I used to get picked on by over-weight chicks in grade school, because of this. They were insecure and angry because they were marginal members of their society.
As you can see, several posters craftily let it slip that they happen to be quite fair.
ROFLMAO!
i used to know a guy in college who used to specifically go outta his way to walk in the shade so he wouldn’t get darker…
hehe… giggle.. chuckle… i need to send this to him… 😉
I hope I can buy this at my local Sam’s Club. Cant wait for the store to open today.
i used to know an indian guy in college who used to specifically go outta his way to walk in the shade so he wouldn’t get darker…
hehe… giggle.. chuckle… i need to send this to him… 😉
You know what, guys — the whole concept of “Fair & Handsome” skin-lightening for aesthetic reasons isn’t a new idea for Indian men. A lot of men back in India, especially amongst the older generation, rub white talcum powder all over their faces in order to “freshen up” when going out, with the actual intention of making their faces look lighter.
I’ll echo cicatrix here — “dominant” is code for “Western”, I assume?
And I don’t think there’s any archaic perception of ‘desis’ operating here — the fact is that notions of fair/dark have been around in the subcontinent for centuries. “Fair and Handsome” and “Fair and Lovely” and their ilk just productize these notions and feed the public’s insecurity about skin color.
Perhaps the “modern” desi — signifying educated, urban, young, professional, Westernized etc. — doesn’t give a damn about skin color. More power to them. But for every modern desi I encounter in India or outside of India, there are those who outwardly or inwardly subscribe to the fair/dark continuum. Whether that makes them buy a fraudulent skin-lightening product, or eliminate a potential mate due to their undesirability based on the ‘Pantone’ scale, is a matter of personal choice, though it’s not one that I support.
Anyway you look at it, it’s a sad state of affairs. It’s almost as though the makers of “Fair and Lovely” have cynically decided to expand into the male vanity market since they’ve milked the female “cash cow” segment to death.
Newamul/Razib: The mere fact that you linked to the pile of shit is all the grain that’s needed. Thank you.
We’re approaching 100 posts… just a few more…
Is there any doubt about which culture is dominant?? – Look at which calender you use – Desis of Hindu, Jain and Islamic religion dont even know which year this is according to their culture. – Which week do you follow?? Do you assume a day off on “Sunday” .. well thats western because its in the 10 commandments.
My above points dont apply to Desis of Christian faith. But the following do.
Who decides which clothes are considered “fashionable” ??? I could go on ….
If one answers above questions, they will not have to pretend that there is no dominant culture.
Chick pea: I used to work with someone just like not to long ago… I thought it was the strangest thing in the world! I wonder if this is common or if we are talking about the same person. I don’t know which would be stranger!
Argus’s comment is well-taken, so I’ll echo it. It is a bit too derivative relying solely on anthropological reasons in explaining the shallow colour based Manichaeanism that is so prevalent amongst desis. The dominant culture and aggrandizement of “european-ness” has a much more immediate impact, especially in a heterogeneous, pressure-to-assimilate society where there exists a dominant culture of commercial beauty. Being a new immigrant to a mostly white suburb certainly did twist my ego a bit, both in terms of looking different and what my expectations of beauty became. I think argus deservedly distinguished this concept from being the “dark one” in the family. As many of you alluded to, it really is an individual action to move on beyond this obsession.
I personally like my men with some color in them – but I don’t discriminate, I regulate every shade of that @$$.
I did always find it interesting that fairness wasn’t always kind of a preference, but straight equated to beauty. I know people who ahem don’t have the nicest facial features, but they’re fair skinned so I hear the aunties remark, “Oh look she’s so pretty!” or “He’s so fair – he’s so handsome!” Or in my own specific case, the ideal of beauty for Punjabi women or South Asian women in general tends to be a woman who is tall, skinny, and fair-skinned. The aunties look at me and go, “…..Well at least she’s fair.” I mean, I think I’m a cutie, but I found something seriously disturbing in the aunties thinking that my fair skin was what made me attractive. I was like, “Bite me, Aunty – it’s my fatty bedunkadunk that makes the boys come running, not my gora gora rang… shiiiiit….” I see the same with men around me as well. Some of those in my circle of friends currently searching for life-partners actually have fair skin as a solid requirement- I find it astounding. I guess that just leaves more Hershey-Chocolate-colored South Asian boytoys for me, innit.
Sweet Force,
You have titillated mutineers no end. We demand you post your pic.
Thanks.