Years ago, here in the United States, when everyone supposedly accepted a "white" standard of beauty, there were skin whitening products for sale as well, with advertising aimed at Black Americans.
@DrWatson Hair weaves, hair straighteners and skin creams that claim to make skin “clearer” are still marketed in our magazines. We’ve not moved completely away from it.
Pretty common theme all throughout Asia tbh. There's a product in Pakistan and India called fair and lovely and I saw so much of it in my home. I think we still have it although I don't use it. I remember at one point the packaging having a brown skinned South Asian woman next to a fairer East Asian looking woman. But this was and is the most common packaging I see these days.
Is this the result of colonialism, or has this always been so in Asian cultures (if you know) ?
In the U.S. there was a time when skin lightening products (Nadinola and Artra, for example) were popular among some African Americans. I know in our case it was because of Eurocentric beauty standards, and the fact that because of the “one drop rule”, people classified as “black” here come in all colors, with lighter skinned people traditionally having had a few more advantages.
@SW-User Yes, but it’s an extra facet to sexism—how "pretty" is defined. And when the adverts I was discussing were popular, lighter skinned black men shared that advantage.
SW-User
@bijouxbroussard Understood and I'm sure racism can apply here, I was more illustrating its deeper in this one.
@SW-User Of course, that’s the point, alas. It’s not just about how people outside these communities see us. It’s how we’ve come to see ourselves. It’s always going to be more difficult for women because women’s looks are considered more important and self-defining.
I wonder what long-term damage such bogus - and they are bogus - cosmetics do if they are not merely a white version of mascara.
In 18-19C Europe, a pale skin was admired NOT for any racial reasons but simple snobbery.
A sun-tanned, weather-beaten face was associated with manual labour day-in-day-out; and those who were not of the "labouring classes" did not want to look as if they were.
It was only the rise of seaside holidays and tourism generally in the 20C that reversed this fashion, by starting to associate a sun-tan with leisure not labour!
And here in the West, many people with light skin work at getting sun tans, or even have paid money to lie in tanning booths, in order to achieve darker skin!
@DrWatson ... for "internal" reasons. In the past, the poor used to worked in the field, so they had brown skin and the upper class could afford a life inside of buildings; as a result, pale skin was a sign of wealth. At present, the poor work in factories, so their skin is pale, and the rich enjoy the sun. Lying in tanning booths means simulating the upper classes' skin color.
@CountScrofula These nations have not been anyone's colonies for a very long time, so I don't think we can hide behind that to excuse trying to bleach the skin.
If anything, living in what may still have been a colony in Great-Grandad's time would more likely encourage keeping one's natural colour.
Whatever is the motive, I think it's something else.
