I know I’m plowing a slightly old furrow here (Manish blogged about this product when it launched back in ’05), but in light of the Guardian commentary today by Sarita Malik that Red Snapper posted on the news tab, and the latest round of skin-ism and politics-of-appearance debates on the comment threads, I thought it might be useful to reproduce the scientific chart to the right. It’s an analysis by Emami Ltd., the makers of “Fair and Handsome” skin lightening creme for men.
The product website is a gold mine of manipulation, insecurity generation, and odd Indian advertising lingo, complete with a list of “free sample receivers” and “hey gals! give your opinion also” exhortations. It’s also, obviously, testimonial that at least in Desh, skin-ism is still in deep effect.
We all know intutively that the phenomenon extends to the diaspora, but how much, and with what consequences, is a matter of (endless) discussion. I have to say that although I found Malik’s commentary well written and to the point, she offered little concrete evidence of skin color discrimination among desis in the UK, and she undermined her piece by referring to Fair and Handsome as a Hindustan Lever (makers of Fair & Lovely) product, which it isn’t.
Anthropologist, primatologist, evolutionary biologist and paleontologist, Nina G. Jablonski’s view on why humans have varying skin color
Joat:
First of all, it was more of an observation than a notion. People have been commenting on skin colors all through this thread….and my comment wasn’t anything outrageous or anything.
Nopes…that prize goes to someone on this site who commented
Kush wrote:
As I had pointed out earlier, my observation was based on a predominantly desi gathering.
brown_fob way to get defensive. Unlike you I did make an attempt to exlain myself. You still take the cake in this thread from me for making the most ridiculous observation. I’m sure at a predominantly desi gathering you knew exactly which person was from Indian and which one was born here. Sorry can’t stop rolling my eyes.
As I had pointed out earlier, my observation was based on a predominantly desi gathering.
But still brown_fob, day in day out, you see white people in USA. You visual memory uses that as background/ baseline.
In India, your visual memory is set to the majority hue there.
I am fairly light-skinned (however, within 24 hours of landing in India or Africa, I tan three shades darker) but when I stand next to frecked (or …), red-haired (or blonde) German beauties, I am very dark. It is all about the curve……like grades at the school.
brown_fob, maybe we should write a NIH grant to investgate further. Jai will be our co-PI (principal investigator) along with Bong Breaker, and sampling will include Sweedes, South Indians, and everyone. Doordarshan will be our outside peer-review.
I am fairly light-skinned
Nigga, please!
Joat:
Yes, I did get defensive..and maybe went on the offensive too. My apologies. I mentioned that IBD-ABD thing as something that I have observed..it was not meant to be a theory or some weird notion of any kind.
Believe me, it’s very easy to differentiate between IBD and ABD groups in college diwali gatherings etc. Most IBDs tend to stay with IBDs..and the same is true with ABDs. You don’t need to be a keen observer to tell the difference.
Believe me, it’s very easy to differentiate between IBD and ABD groups in college diwali gatherings etc. Most IBDs tend to stay with IBDs..and the same is true with ABDs. You don’t need to be a keen observer to tell the difference.
I think with men, its easier to tell. The style of clothes, hairstyle etc. are good indicators.
Well that’s not my field of study. I tend to focus my attention more on the fairer sex (no pun intended).
Just to clarify:
I don’t think that all or most or even a great number of dark skinned indian women who date out do so because they cant get an indian man. I just meant that I’d understand if such an individual would choose to date interracially, given the cicumstances.
…
Disagree.
Because;
Being thin is not neccessarily an indicator of good health.
I’m a vegetarian who eats mostly organic and alot of raw. I take high potency good quality vitamin supplements. I exercise regularly, don’t drink or smoke or do drugs. I’m healthy. I’m not thin. Alot of thin people I know do not lead healthy lives. On the other hand I know alot of what would be considered “overweight” people who live very healthy lifestyles – on all levels.
So what is more unhealthy about using a skin lightening cream than using other make-up, shampoos, or eating processed foods. They all have basicallyl the same (unhealthy) chemicals in them?
Even most “diet” or “health-food” products have some unhealthy chemicals in them.
If you say it is more psychologically unhealthy, I still disagree.
Just ask people who feel inadequate or whatever due to the fact that they are constantly striving to be thin, when they are of a normal weight, but what their peers or the media deems “fat”.
I think you’re confusing what hollywood views as thin with my idea of what is thin and healthy. It is entirely possible to be the size of America Ferrera or Oprah and be healthy. Moreso than many of these rail thin women that do not exercise at all for fear of bulk while starving themselves skinny.
But at the end of the day, when you start moving from curvy to a little overweight all the way toward obese… then you move from “might be healthy” to almost automatic health risk. Unless, of course, you have some other health problem that makes it difficult for you to lose weight.
That could be true. And the same goes for skin lightening enthusiasts. A slightly lighter skin appearance most likely won’t do much chemical damage (no more than any other processed chemical product they use or injest). If their skin starts to look like Micheal Jacksons’ however, then they probably have a health problem.
Oh wait, I think we’re on different pages… I don’t think that light or dark skin is an indicator of health. It just is.
I thought your point was that using skin lightening creams was more physically and psychologically unhealthy than than the efforts to become thin.
I’m just wondering what is more unhealthy about it?
Oh no… I was saying that people’s desire for thin mates isn’t just a product of hollywood. Being not just thin, but fit is a health thing. But people’s desire for mates with lighter skin seems to be more a result of social factors than a health issue.
Hehe. Thats exactly the way to deal with desis, including the stupid, nasty color-obsessed aunties, who try to distance themselves from the desi stereotype.
So what’s Michael Jackson’s secret? Anyone know? Whatever it is, it really worked!
116
Did you even read Kush’s comment before making yours? All he was trying to do is to give an example to add to his earlier comment.
If you people bothered to look at Kush’s link on his handle name, you’ll see a photo that shows that he is indeed on the lighter side, as desis go. So why are people giving him a hard time for his comment?
Hehe. Thats exactly the way to deal with desis, including the stupid, nasty color-obsessed aunties, who try to distance themselves from the desi stereotype.
If you people bothered to look at Kush’s link on his handle name, you’ll see a photo that shows that he is indeed on the lighter side, as desis go. So why are people giving him a hard time for his comment?
Ok, I am the one who wrote ‘Nigga please!’. Good Lord! This was a joke. For those who dont watch Chappel, here you go. I have known Kush long enough on SM to know that he is not like the nasty color obsessed aunties. I was kidding with him!
Ha Ha, in my case, I don’t really fit into either the IBD or ABD groups in terms of the above indicators (plus accent). It’s hilarious when people from both groups just decide that I must be ‘British’.
Actually there was this recent British crossover movie (‘Ae fond kiss’) which had a Brit-Pakistani girl telling her sister about a prospective groom: “He’s tall, fair and has a head full of hair, what more could you want?”. That’s when I realized why I don’t get any attention from the desi ladies (short, dark and shaved head 😀 ).
Fatwa from Cairo against skin bleaching creams; http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?set_id=1&click_id=85&art_id=qw1161865442870B221
From the link:
“Gomaa explained that the use of these creams which are widely used in Arab countries is considered making changes to what God created.
He supported his opinion by a verse from the Quran which talks about the Devil’s temptation to humans to make them change the form of what God has created.”
Sounds like the Sikh rationale for not cutting hair.
So how do these irrational mullahs reconcile the universal muslim practice of snipping off the foreskin of males? And the (much less widespread) practice of cutting off the female clitoris? Isn’t that changing “the form of what God has created”?
The cutting of the foreskin is a “covenant” between God and his “chosen” – that is how it is usually explained by Jews.
Nonetheless, in ancient times, in desert areas it would make sense to do so being that water, and thus health and cleanliness, was scarce. Bacteria and what-not can seep underneath the skin and cause damage, perhaps even leading to disease and death. But in parts of the globe where water was easily available, no need for such a precaution. And certainly in modern times and modern areas with moder conveniences, there is no longer any need, even if you live in a desert.
The jews did not invent the practice of circumcision. The ancient Egyptions were doing it millenia before them. And quite likely thats where the ancient hebrews learnt this african practice: during their centuries of slavery in Egypt.
In any case, that does not answer the question posed: “how do these irrational mullahs reconcile the universal muslim practice of snipping off the foreskin of males?……Isn’t that changing “the form of what God has created”?
Fact is, the Koran does not command muslims to cut their foreskins. It is the Sunnah of Mohammad, from the time he was still in thrall of judaism, that is the basis for this muslim requirement.
Truthseeker
And quite likely thats where the ancient hebrews learnt this african practice: during their centuries of slavery in Egypt.
Actually, there is absolutely NO archaeological or any kind of written evidence that the Jews were ever enslaved by the Egyptians. In fact, the Egyptians were such thorough documenters of every aspect of their lives particularly during the several millennia that the Jews were supposed to be enslaved that such a momentous event as the slavery of the Jews plus all the drama around their “leaving” would have been fully documented.
And, the Jews did not build the pyramids. This was done using contractors who either hired workers or had slaves (the non-Jewish types).
sp
Truthseeker
He supported his opinion by a verse from the Quran which talks about the Devil’s temptation to humans to make them change the form of what God has created.”
Sounds like the Sikh rationale for not cutting hair.
The Sikh rationale for not cutting hair has absolutely nothing to with what God has created or not. It is considered an identity marker…if you read the historical records there are several reasons given for this but I have never heard the faith one.
Also, there is some debate among some historians when this marker was adopted…
sp
Ancient Egyptians circumsized males?
What was there reason for that?
I would see none for those living by the Nile.
But there is a school of thought that says Abraham and Moses were students of the Egyptian Mystery Schools.
I currently live in Hong Kong and creams of this nature are everywhere, even the local store on the corner. I know the race issue products like these can raise but realistically I don’t see any difference between this type of cream or tanning cream. Alot of people just seem to have a problem with being who they are at birth. You’re too white, not white enough, you’re nose is too big or you have an arse like the back end of a bus. People always find physical flaws within themselves and others and think that changing their physical appearance will change their lives.