Call it 'Glow & Lovely' or 'Fair & Lovely', it still perpetuates colourism in our society.
/
In wake of the Black Lives Matter (BLM) protests, Unilever's “Fair and Lovely” skin lightening cream has been rebranded as “Glow and Lovely”. Instead of reworking the formula of their skin lightening cream into another product or just pulling the product from off the shelves, all Unilever has done is change one word in the name of their product (which, incidentally, makes the name grammatically incorrect). It’s hardly revolutionary stuff.
This highly cynical and performative move from Unilever should be called out for what it is. Tokenism. Unilever has taken no tangible action to correct the time, money and effort that they have poured into convincing people that light skin is the only acceptable standard of beauty. A word change does nothing to address the colourism that their products perpetuate. Furthermore, using buzz words such as “glowing” “brightening” and “spot reducing” are just marketing euphemisms for “whitening”, and are a poor attempt at putting a veneer of acceptability on an outdated and problematic product.
Across South Asia and the diaspora, skin lightening creams are hugely popular and have received endorsements from big Bollywood actors such as Kareena Kapoor, Shah Rukh Khan and Priyanka Chopra. However, despite Bollywood’s best advertising efforts, the fact remains that these creams are dangerous. Many contain dangerous levels of corticosteroids, mercury, hydrogen peroxide, and glutathione which can irreparably damage the skin.
The creams, and the advertisements that go along with them, reinforce the view that dark skin is undesirable; which actively contributes to the harmful obsession with light skin that grips the South Asian community.
Colourism is entrenched within our communities, and there is a nuanced difference between colourism and racism. Dr Sarah L Webb gives an excellent explainer on the difference,
And actress Lupita Nyong'o summarised colourism perfectly when she said,
"Colourism is the daughter of racism" in "a world that rewards lighter skin over darker skin".
We are brought up in a culture where an obsession concerning the shade of our skin colour is ingrained in us from childhood, and constantly reinforced through to adulthood. A person’s self-worth becomes intrinsically linked to the hue of their skin. Fair skin is seen as the epitome of beauty and status, whilst darker skin is viewed as something to be ashamed or embarrassed about, especially for women.
Within the South Asian community colourism has been influenced by a range of factors, including the remnants of colonialism, caste-based systems and Eurocentric beauty standards, and it manifests itself in different ways. For example, Bollywood has a long history of showing dark skinned people as villains, servants, figures of ridicule and people of low status. In Bollywood’s first Oscar nominated film, Mother India, the good son is light skinned and the bad son is dark skinned.
Actor Sunil Dutt went as far as to blacken his face to play the role of the bad son. Or consider Shaadi.com, India’s foremost marriage website, who recently launched a filter that allowed people to search for potential partners on the basis of their skin colour.
So in the wake of the BLM protests why not just pull the product off the shelves? Because colourism pays.
By preying on the insecurity of dark-skinned girls and boys, cosmetics brands make over $450 million annually in sales in India, and globally the skin lightening industry is worth between $10- 20 billion. The BLM movement could have been a real watershed moment for Unilever to recognise and address their own role in reinforcing colour hierarchies in society. Instead, in the wake of a global call for change and equality, Unilever continue to peddle the same anti-black product, just under a different name. All they have done is (badly) attempt to quell the backlash and intense focus that the BLM movement brought upon their products, so that they can continue to tell the South Asian community that we should all be whiter. Whoops, sorry I meant “Brighter”.
Cosmetics brands, like Unilever, Procter & Gamble and L’Oreal, have perpetuated the pernicious myth that millions of people would be better looking, happier and more fulfilled if only their skin was lighter for years. A simple rebrand does not absolve them of the inimical consequences of their actions. If cosmetics brands truly want to take steps to address the damage that they have caused, they need to take decisive action and immediately pull their harmful products off the shelves for good.
It is time to demand real accountability from brands that aggravate and then exploit colourism. We should not have to settle for performative lip service. Sign petitions, use the power of social media, put pressure on companies by writing to them and be mindful of purchasing power. Make it clear only companies driven by an inclusive vision of beauty deserve consumer support.