Last weekend, Johnson & Johnson announced it would no longer sell skin-lightening products. The company will be axing Neutrogenaâs Fine Fairness line and Clean & Clearâs Clear Fairness creams in Asia, the Middle East and India. âSome product names or claims on our dark spot reducer products represent fairness or white as better than your own unique skin tone,â the company said in a statement. âThis was never our intentionâhealthy skin is beautiful skin.â
Johnson & Johnsonâs commitment to discontinuing these products sets a much-needed precedent for the beauty industry. It comes just weeks after social media users called out Indian celebrities who had created social media posts in support of Black Lives Matter, but also previously endorsed skin-lightening creams. The actresses included Priyanka Chopra, Sonam Kapoor, Disha Patani and Kiara Advani. All of them were advertising the creams of brands that are household names in AmericaâLâOréal, Ponds and Garnier.
Niveaâa company that came under fire in 2017 for a British ad campaign that featured the phrase âWhite is purityââis also a major player when it comes to skin-lightening products. As is Unilever, the parent company of Doveâa brand known for pushing a message of inclusivity in the United States.
Unilever has been historically unrepentant about its Fair & Lovely brand and the accompanying marketing campaigns that have often equated romantic and professional success with lighter skin. In 2017, a statement from Unilever defended its stance by saying: âEven-toned and lighter skin remains the most sought-after beauty desire across Asia and parts of Africa and Latin America.â Fair & Lovely remains one of the most commonly available skin-lightening brands in the United States.
In the last few weeks, some of these same companies have paid lip service to Americaâs racial justice movement.
Black Lives Matter. #blackoutuesday pic.twitter.com/3HDnVfCmFN
— Garnier USA (@garnierUSA) June 2, 2020
View this post on Instagram We demand justice, equity and advancement. We must do our part. Unilever believes it is our responsibility to take action to create systemic change to address institutionalized racism and social injustice. We are starting with five focus areas : – We have pledged more than $1 million to date to organizations and activists working for social justice and racial equality, including @blklivesmatter, @naturbanleague, National Bail Fund Network and the @bailproject. These commitments come from Unilever and our brands such as @SheaMoisture, @AXE, @TAZO, @Suave, @SeventhGeneration and @Degree . – We will continue to increase our work with and investment in diverse suppliers . – We continue to work to ensure the diversity of our workforce fully reflects the communities we serve . – We uphold a zero-tolerance policy on intolerance – both among Unilever employees and the suppliers, customers and partners that work with us . – We will add our voice and influence to advocate for safe and fair access to voting in the US this November . #BlackLivesMatter A post shared by Unilever Global #StaySafe (@unilever) on Jun 3, 2020 at 2:33pm PDT
LâOréal Paris stands in solidarity with the Black community, and against injustice of any kind. We are making a commitment to the @NAACP to support progress in the fight for justice. #BlackLivesMatter pic.twitter.com/4VDZUAdgXv
— L'Oréal Paris USA (@LOrealParisUSA) June 1, 2020
(That last post from LâOréal prompted a response from model Munroe Bergdorf who claimed that in 2017, the company âdropped me from a campaign and threw me to the wolves for speaking out about racism and white supremacy.â)
For the beauty industry, promoting and selling lighter skin tones is a multi-billion dollar businessâspecifically, $8.3 billion in 2018. In 2009, Indian consumers alone spent $432 million in pursuit of lighter skin. And while America does not see the types of mainstream marketing used in other parts of the world, these kinds of products arenât hard to find in local pharmacies and beauty shops. What’s more, the internet has made available a mind-boggling array of skin-lightening products.
A quick Google search sent me almost immediately to an Amazon page unabashedly titled âSkin Bleaching.â And while many of the items on the page are dressed up as dark spot correctors, scar reducers or âbrighteningâ products, there are numerous other creams, serums and supplements that are more brazen about their raison dâêtre.
While some products are undoubtedly safer than others, America has known for decades that skin-lightening products can be dangerous. In 2010, the New York Times reported that: âDermatologists nationwide are seeing women of Hispanic and African descent, among others, with severe side effects … from the misuse of skin-lightening creams, many with prescription-strength ingredients,â including steroids.
In that same article, one dermatologist, Dr. Eliot F. Battle Jr, stated: âItâs happening more because the internet has been a great source for these patients to get physician-strength or prescription-strength products.â
The fight against skin-lightening products has already started in other countries. In 2015, they were banned on the Ivory Coast. In 2019, they were banned in Ghana, Rwanda, South Africa and Sudan. However, despite a Europe-wide ban on skin-lightening products containing dangerous ingredients (such as hydroquinone and mercury), consumers there are still seeking them out.
Last year, Britainâs Local Government Association issued a warning after seizing thousands of illegal skin-lightening products. Calling hydroquinone âthe biological equivalent of paint stripper,â an LGA representative said: âSkin creams containing banned ingredients are very dangerous and could seriously damage your health, scar you for life and even kill you, so they should be avoided at all costs.â
While larger companies have the means to more rigorously test their products before they hit the shelves, the social implications of all skin-lightening brands are the same across the board. Not only do they have roots in colonial ideals around beauty and status, Hasan Minaj also recently highlighted the link between such products and racism towards the Black community.
In an impassioned June 3 monologue, speaking specifically of the South Asian community, Minaj said:
We love Black America on screen, in our living rooms. But if a Black man walks into your living room, or wants to dateâGod forbid, marryâyour daughter? Youâd call the cops! Do you know what we call Black people? We call them ‘Kala.’ It means blackânot in a good way. If someone in your family is dark skinned, we clown them. We call them ‘Kallu.’ Our Bollywood stars do skin whitening commercials, so we donât look Black. It is bad to be Black in Desi culture, even though we all wish we were Black. You donât think that affects how we view Black people?
There are signs that skin-lightening fatigue amongst consumers is on the rise. Just this week, Shaadiâa dating site popular with the Indian diasporaâremoved a feature that asked its users to specify the lightness of their skin tone, using descriptors including âFair,â âWheatish,â and âDark.â The decision was made just two weeks after a petition was set up, demanding the change.
At this moment of trying to exact systemic change at the highest levels, worrying about what the cosmetics industry is doing can seem somewhat inconsequential. But while statues are being torn down, old movies are being reevaluated and TV shows are being revised, it would serve American consumers to understand just which companies continue to profit from, and push, beauty ideals that center white supremacy.
Copyright 2020 KQED