Skip to content

Category: Fashion Industry

Unilever – because white skin is the best skin.

This week I’d like to share a guest blog post by  Melinda Tankard Reist. Melinda is an author, speaker, commentator, blogger and advocate for women and girls.

As I have just returned from an amazing repeat visit working with Indigenous girls in Griffith, rural NSW ( I shared the first in this series of workshops in a previous post) Melinda’s words particularly resonated with me.

I too have questioned the beauty industry’s obsession with making us feel (quite literally) uncomfortable in our own skin.  Back in 2007 I also offered the short film “A Girl Like Me” as stimulus for this discussion. I will also share it again here: Melinda’s post to follow.

MTR-193x300Promoting white supremacy

Here at the MTR blog we’re not exactly what you’d call fans of the global corporation Unilever.

Unilever has been named and shamed here before for its sexist advertising through the Lynx/Axe brand as highlighted here and here, for its hypocrisy in promoting so-called “real beauty” through its Dove brand while presenting women in degrading and objectifying ways, for its Slimfast products promoting rapid weight loss (because real beauty only comes in size skinny) and for promoting skin whitening products to dark-skinned women (Unilever – to the rescue of dark not skinny women everywhere!).

Now Unilever has taken its white supremacist ways a step further, with a new Facebook application which enables Indian men to lighten their profiles, while at the same time promoting its Vaseline brand of skin lightening products. The company spruiks the product using a Bollywood star whose face is split in half, showing the (unsightly) dark side and the (magically transformed) light side.

vaseline-skin-white-app

Unilever appears to have no shame. One of its earlier skin bleaching products was called “White Beauty”. Playing on certain racial insecurities by telling dark skinned people that they can never really be beautiful – that’s what Unilever is doing. For some great Unilever dark skin despising action, check out this You Tube clip.

Of course, it’s not just Unilever. Garnier, Nivea and L’Oreal (‘because you’re worth white skin’. OK, I made that up) do the same. These products promote ethnocentric stereotypes about the superiority of white people.

Sociology professor T. K. Oommen at the Jawaharlal Nehru University in New Delhi told Agence France Presse:

Lighter skin is associated with the ruling social class, with wealth, with general betterment. Skin lightening creams for women have been a cosmetics staple in India for decades, so when a men’s cream debuted a few years ago, its success was almost ensured.

Even Indian children are internalising these dark-skin shaming messages, with 12-14 year olds constituting 13 percent of India’s skin whitening market.

The products are also dangerous, causing kidney damage and thin skin. They have also been connected to cancer (see: The hidden costs of skin whitening products).

Indian dermatologist Dr Aamer Khan has seen a rise in women suffering from serious skin conditions as a result of skin bleaching.

I see patients with hypo-pigmentation (loss of pigment) resulting in white patches and hyper-pigmentation leading to darker areas – both are caused by skin bleaching agents. People buy these creams that offer false hopes, but the fact is, there is no safe way to whiten your skin. There needs to be more stringent moderating of these products, as it is a very serious problem.

This is a perfect quote illustrating the hypocrisy, also from The Guardian:

…in an era of increasing transparency, parent companies like Unilever can’t hide behind a barrage of sub-brands anymore. They can’t promote skin-lightening in India and self-esteem in England and expect to retain any credibility when it comes to their corporate brand.

There’s a campaign calling on Facebook to remove racist applications. Why not add your name to it today.

Does size matter?

Guest post by Enlighten’s Program Manager for South Australia, Jane Higgins

An article in the Adelaide’s Advertiser on Saturday 20th September, 2008 sparked my interest.

Apparently a review of the Australian Textile, Clothing and Footwear Industries was released this week by the Federal Industry Minister, Kim Carr. The review recommend that $5 million be put towards developing a “consistent Australian sizing standard.” They argue that women are frustrated by the discrepancy in sizing in different stores. Being a size16 myself, I find I can range in size anywhere from a 14 – 20 and it is annoying to be at the mercy of a label’s decision of how to size their garments!

What is astounding, is that our clothing sizing has been based on the American research conducted by Berlei in 1926.

So much has changed since then including the size, lifestyle and habits of women. A National Size and Shape survey conducted by Henneberg and Veitch in 2004 involved taking 65 individual measurements from 1300 women and 100 men across the country, and was backed up by a study of 5000 people. It found that women today are up to 20% heavier than they were when the Berlei survey was done. Shock horror!! The average measurements of an Australian woman in the regular size range is now a 92cm bust, 74cm waist and 99cm hips, which fit a size 16 on the current Standards Australia garment rating. Further they found that the average woman in Adelaide was 77kg, and the women in Brisbane, 73kg. In fact Veitch goes onto say that 50% of Australian Women are not catered for with the present sizings .

According to this research, I am finally normal!!!! Will wonders never cease??!!

Some critics of the present sizings suggest we use numbers 1-5 as a new way of identifying our appropriate sizing. This week I went to a fashion parade of a big women’s label that uses S, M, L but being a 16 is equal to a Small in their range. As a mature woman I have a different body shape to a 20 year old woman who is also a size 16. My boobs are saggier, my tummy is flabbier and I have fat stored in places I never knew existed.

Attempting to buy up to date fashion in my size is incredibility difficult. But my solution has always been to buy most of my wardrobe from op shops. What fun I have finding that barging that reflects who I am in an individual way. I am also aware that this constant buying is not only placing stress on our bank balances, our sense of ourselves but also the environment. Apparently it takes about 2700 litres of water to make one cotton T-shirt!!!!!!!!!!!

Another issue worth considering is the impact our “passion for fashion” may be having on the environment. A report from the Council of Textiles and Fashion Industries found we are becoming a nation that considers clothing to be disposable . It showed that in 2007, women under 30 bought 102 items of clothing a year, double that of women over 30. There are now concerns on where these cheap clothes go after women decide the garment’s use-by date is up. Fuelling the high turnover of clothing is the new wave of fast-fashion stores that produce cheaper clothes flooding into stores every week.

Our worth cannot be measured by an arbiturary size. I am more than my size 16 – much bolder, bigger and fuller than a number could ever reflect! If a new sizing standard is to be introduced it must consider women of all ages, shapes and sizes – not just the antiquated cardboard cutouts from the past.

Now … I must write to Federal Industry Minister, Kim Carr and let him know I would develop a National sizing Standard for $4.9 million!!!

With love
Jane

 

 

Skip to toolbar