Feria Can Lighten Anything You Want at Racialicious - the intersection of race and pop culture

Feria Can Lighten Anything You Want

by Latoya Peterson

So, I was browsing Jezebel and came across this Photoshop of Horrors entry:

And I thought to myself, what person is this supposed to be? I don’t quite recognize the…wait a sec, that’s supposed to be Beyonce?

Now, Beyonce is a style chameleon.

But I looked at this shot:

And this one:

And a few others, and she still looks like Bey. Even with the changes in make up, hair, and the application of Photoshop, she is still recognizable.

But what did they do to her skin? And her nose?

(Thanks to Jezebel for letting me snatch their scans.)

Edited:

I’m going to add another photo:

And commentary from Cheryl Lynn:

Can we please lay off Beyonce? I highly doubt that this woman, who we have all seen get blissfully darker as she gallivants across the globe with her husband, fired up the ol’ Photoshop in order to lighten her skin color for this advertisement. Why direct your ire at Beyonce? […]

You want to do something to stop it? Contact the companies that do this and inform them that you will no longer be buying their products until the situation has been rectified. But giving the side-eye to fair-skinned black women who are just trying to make a living? Lame. Especially when these women have been some of the most vocal about the rampant colorism taking place in the entertainment industry. Why? Because they get a front row seat when it comes to viewing the damage that is inflicted upon dark-skinned women who are told that they will never be worthy enough. They see what has been done to their daughters and sisters. And it cuts them deeply. Why yell at the only people trying to keep you from falling while the rest of the world tries to knock you down?

Trackbacks & Pings

Whitewash and Photoshop | afrobella on 08 Aug 2008 at 10:02 am

[…] issues that only becomes controversial when it’s glaringly obvious. Respect to Jezebel and Racialicious for wading so deep into the issue, because sometimes I’m like — not […]
This Just In from AfroBella: L’Oreal WhiteWashes Beyonce « SisterSpeak Online Business Blog on 08 Aug 2008 at 11:56 am

[…] industry sins that only become controversial when it’s glaringly obvious. Respect to Jezebel and Racialicious for wading so deep into the issue, because sometimes I’m like — oh no, not […]
This Just In: L’Oreal WhiteWashes Beyonce (Surprised?) « SisterSpeak Online’s Beauty Suite on 08 Aug 2008 at 11:59 am

[…] industry sins that only become controversial when it’s glaringly obvious. Respect to Jezebel and Racialicious for wading so deep into the issue, because sometimes I’m like — oh no, not […]
Links on the fritz again « don’t ya wish your girlfriend was smart like me? on 11 Aug 2008 at 4:13 pm

[…] Feria Can Lighten Anything You Want http://www.racialicious.com/2008/08/07/feria-can-lighten-anything-you-want/ from Racialicious: just, awful […]
L’Oréal, Beyoncé And Cultural Cluéléssnéss at Racialicious - the intersection of race and pop culture on 12 Aug 2008 at 10:30 am

[…] planned to examine the L’Oréal/Beyoncé drama, as others have already addressed it with better perspective, better emotion and better boycotting. Besides, it’s always best to avoid touching a Black […]

Comments

Renee wrote:

I do not understand why they did this to her image..it defeats the purpose of even having a celebrity advertise a product because she is unrecognizable The idea that the lighter you are the more beautiful you are is at play here…wrong, wrong..

Posted 07 Aug 2008 at 10:52 am ¶
PaulPortland wrote:

All I got to say is, Goddamn fucking shit fuck. Can I say that? Currently, 80% of the world population is non-white and trending towards 90% by 2050-2060. Obviously when I bring up these numbers, I’m not making some kind of veiled threat about how white people need to start working overtime on that Mars Colonization plan of theirs or whatever. I’m just saying…goddamn it, I’m just saying when will we put this beauty myth to bed?

Posted 07 Aug 2008 at 11:00 am ¶
TierList E wrote:

Disappointing, but not at all surprising. I see possibly similar effect happening in fanart depiction of brown WoC.

“Now, I want to depict this character, but I also want her attractive . . .oh, I know, let me just scrub off all that extra melanin! Now she’s hawt!”

That stopped me from asking for fanart requests quick.

Posted 07 Aug 2008 at 11:00 am ¶
Jack D. wrote:

Wow. Heck of a job.
Re the nose: I think the photog turned her sideways to an angle that accentuated the perspective of length and downplayed the width. Same nose, not post-photo manipulated.
Re the color: Damned if I know. The entire photo is washed, of course (note the eyes). And they obviously used a very bright, mostly white background which affected the ambient reflected light (compare with the second photo with more black/blue tones).
Re the reason: Ummmm, yeah…

Posted 07 Aug 2008 at 11:07 am ¶
Stef wrote:

It took me a sec to figure out her identity too. I think the lighter eyebrows really make a difference in her appearance.

Posted 07 Aug 2008 at 11:08 am ¶
Barbara B. wrote:

“But what did they do to her skin? And her nose?”

Don’t forget the eyes!

Posted 07 Aug 2008 at 11:13 am ¶
Kandee wrote:

Are we outraged because they took it too far? But we’re not outraged when B straightens and weaves it up to portray the same concept of ‘white is beautiful’? It still looks like her, just with the hair we’ve all been told we should want. Maybe that’s what L’Oreal is selling us - for all the same ingrained, systemically racist, beauty ideal reasons people fight against daily.

Posted 07 Aug 2008 at 11:18 am ¶
Latoya Peterson wrote:

@all - See Edit above.

Posted 07 Aug 2008 at 11:23 am ¶
DEAF FEMINIST PUNK!! wrote:

dont you guys know that any woman, who is NOT white, is automatically UGLY?!?!?!

duhhhhhhhhhh

*sarcastic*

Posted 07 Aug 2008 at 11:25 am ¶
DEAF FEMINIST PUNK!! wrote:

since we’re on the topic of white-washing, y’all, I’ve noticed how Aishwarya Rai (big Bollywood movie star, FYI) has also been white-washed to look white as HELL in those beauty ads (I think for L’Oreal) and she barely looks South Asian.

it pisses me off, u guys!!!!!!!!! I’m Indian and I feel insulted and outraged!!!!

Posted 07 Aug 2008 at 11:27 am ¶
Latoya Peterson wrote:

@DFP -

I know exactly what you mean. I just read an issue of Vogue India, and while I found a lot of things to love, I noticed Aishawarya looking a little…different.

Posted 07 Aug 2008 at 11:32 am ¶
Alexandra wrote:

This is so disgusting. Time for a boycott. Thing that bothers me the most is they act like people are not going to notice the change. Most people are know what Beyonce looks like so they are going to notice such a drastic change.

Posted 07 Aug 2008 at 11:34 am ¶
Roxie wrote:

I recognized her immediately…but damn, they did try to make her skin match her hair.

Posted 07 Aug 2008 at 11:41 am ¶
drispe wrote:

Exactly, Kandee. Her weaves and skin tone helped her to be the breakout star of Destiny’s Child. Note that she hasn’t denounced this little scandal. Ultimately the beauty companies must be confronted. Photoshop or not, they always hire lighter women like her or Rihanna to fill their exotic quota.

Posted 07 Aug 2008 at 11:46 am ¶
Alfred Lopez wrote:

@ Alexandra

Boycott? Boycott who?
I sometimes wonder if people really understand what boycott means anymore and how to stage a successful one. I am all for a boycott, but we got to do it right. Boycott the products. Boycott the celebrities. Boycott the channels that air the commercials. Boycott the media that continues to support the celebrities.
You can’t be selective in a successful boycott. You have to tell them you are serious. When WE boycotted the Montgomery bus system, we didn’t do it selectively. When it was convenient. We struggled! We endured! But we showed THEM that we would rather walk 10 miles to work. That we would rather wake up 2 hours earlier so we can get to work on time than use the buses. So if coloured women, and I mean women of all tones and shades, are willing to not wear make-up; and all men who date coloured women don’t mind their lady not wearing cosmetics, then maybe we can make a difference.
And I mean no hostilities. But I am just trying to be real.

Posted 07 Aug 2008 at 11:54 am ¶
Rchoudh wrote:

This photoshopping really is drastic. Why’d they go and change her skin and eye color so much? Now potential customers’ focus will no longer be on her hair because of the distracting nature of her entire look. And the side shot further makes her seem unrecognizable as a famous black celebrity.

Posted 07 Aug 2008 at 12:03 pm ¶
Anna wrote:

There was an article in a recent New Yorker (http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2008/05/12/080512fa_fact_collins) about the way in which photos get digitally retouched during and after a photo shoot.

It doesn’t directly address race (as I remember), but it might help shed some light on what actually happens to a photo before it ends up on the internet or in a magazine. Certainly the same effects used to change women’s bodies could be used to change skin or hair color.

Posted 07 Aug 2008 at 12:05 pm ¶
bertie wrote:

Reminds of the Naomi Campbell superbowl add–it took me and my party guests at least 10 to 15 secs into the 30 sec add to realize it was actually Naomi Campbell in the add. They had lightened her skin to an unreal level (pardon the eww factor but in college I had large poster of Naomi in my dorm room so I am well acquainted with her looks.) The odd thing about the ad was her skin tone/features were still obviously black–just a much lighter skinned black woman than Naomi. Its like they just couldn’t trust that american beer commercial fans would find her attractive with her natural dark skin–despite her being a f@#kin supermodel. I swear, I feel its like psychological warfare waged on sisters–I mean if even supermodel Naomi has to get light to get right, what chance does my brown skinned daughter have.

Posted 07 Aug 2008 at 12:10 pm ¶
DEAF FEMINIST PUNK!! wrote:

@ bertie: i never saw that commercial, but that’s so fuckin sad, man.

Naomi is such a beautiful woman and I LOVE her dark black skin.

Posted 07 Aug 2008 at 12:26 pm ¶
atlasien wrote:

Is that Jessica Alba?

Posted 07 Aug 2008 at 12:42 pm ¶
Latoya Peterson wrote:

@Atlasien -

If you squint to the right, it’s Alba. I squinted to the left and it looks like Uma Thurman with a tan and sandy hair.

Posted 07 Aug 2008 at 12:45 pm ¶
Myles wrote:

I’m going to say that her nose doesn’t look that bad to me.

Her mouth is almost smiling, which makes her nose look bigger and the shape seems normal.

I also think that the photo is really washed out.

And, yeah, it most likely to make her look whiter.

Posted 07 Aug 2008 at 12:48 pm ¶
Black Canseco wrote:

Hard to get too wound up about all this because i’ve seen it from the inside out for the last 17 years.

As some of you may know (hi Carmen!) I work in advertising as a creative. Spent years writing commercials, print ads, etc. If you’re wearing it, driving it, drinking it, or self-medicating with it, there’s a really good chance i helped sell it to you.

Now with all that said:

This Beyonce thing is par for the course in the marketing/media worlds. And I say “par” because if you think this is bad, i’ve got a million stories about ads and commercials you’ve seen that would make you cringe. Beyonce got off easy on this one.

I’ve worked on beauty accounts and haircare clients–straight hair sells across demos, curly hair sells among the “quirky” oft younger set, and ethnic hair is seen as “making a statement” or a problem that just needs to be fixed.

I’m a writer/CD so i don’t do it, but the art directors, photographers and retouch artists at agencies and subcontracted by clients do it all time. They’re told to do it. They’re paid to do it. And most importantly, they’re fired if they don’t do it. (Trust me on that last one.)

The White Girls are made to look Whiter, and by “whiter” i mean as idealized as possible. And by “idealized” i mean fitting into the mutual-ongoing- mindf***k-circlejerk that iso Anglo-centric feminine beauty.

The sistahs are made to look as anglo as possible and “mainstream” as we like to say in the business. That is, unless we’re talking “urban chic” or “exotica” in which case they get what I call the Dark Continent Treatment where their skin is darkened and they’re made to wear stupid trinkets and outfits that make Masai Sengalese tribesfolk go, “WTF?!”

The hispanic, asian and multiethnic talent we cast in commercials and media outlets are simply stuck in the middle of the black/white spectrum, which is white=good/pretty, black=bad/ugly.

And yeah, it happened to Beyonce. Will Smith is lightened in most of his media work, 50 Cent is darkened so he looks more “thuggish”(read: inner city), Rhianna gets lightened… on and on.

I’ve never worked with an ethnic actor or model or on air talent that wasn’t lightened or deformed in some sort of way to appeal to the masses.

It’s simply part of the business; and the business does it because it sells; and it sells because the masses of folks prefer it/are comfortable with it/believe this is how it should be.

So now what?

Posted 07 Aug 2008 at 12:59 pm ¶
cw wrote:

michael jackson said it best. if everybody in hollywood who had plastic surgery vacated nobody would be there. BLACK IS BEAUTIFUL BUT HOW MANY PEOPLE IN THE BUSINESS TRULY BELIEVE THIS!

Posted 07 Aug 2008 at 1:03 pm ¶
JD/ formerly J wrote:

lololol……This is me laughing to keep from crying. Then we all act surprised when little black girls pick the white doll as the ‘pretty’ one in the doll test.

Posted 07 Aug 2008 at 1:05 pm ¶
JD/ formerly J wrote:

P.S Since when did Beyonce use Feria? Didn’t she buy that weave in color 33? lol….

Posted 07 Aug 2008 at 1:06 pm ¶
Gothic Guera wrote:

I thought that was Laura Prepon (From that 70’s show) . It’s sad day when you mistake a Beyonce for a redhead and in the 3rd picture she looks like Brigitte bardot!

Posted 07 Aug 2008 at 1:17 pm ¶
Monie wrote:

As I commented on another blog; I bet Michael Jackson is sooooo jealous right now.

Posted 07 Aug 2008 at 1:22 pm ¶
Myles wrote:

And noone is going to mention that her hair looks really dry and strawlike?

Posted 07 Aug 2008 at 1:29 pm ¶
JD/ formerly J wrote:

Cosign Myles…ITA that is not even weave she is wearing. It might be hay…YIKES!!

Posted 07 Aug 2008 at 1:38 pm ¶
Eva wrote:

Seriously, I thought it was Tyra Banks.

Posted 07 Aug 2008 at 1:43 pm ¶
Myles wrote:

So, JD, not only did they take a pic from the wrong angle, wake her look washed out to the point that she looks weird and like a different person. . . .

They made her hair, the ENTIRE point of the add, look like crap!

I don’t want to buy something from a zombie with split ends.

Hmm, i really feel like I should be able to focus more on the racial side of this, but I can’t get passed how bad her hair looks

Posted 07 Aug 2008 at 1:59 pm ¶
Tiffany wrote:

@JD/ formerly J

“Then we all act surprised when little black girls pick the white doll as the ‘pretty’ one in the doll test.”

Exactly …

Posted 07 Aug 2008 at 2:00 pm ¶
Jenn wrote:

This is not shocking, Beyonce turned into a white woman years ago. Just look at Destiny Childs early videos, Beyonce has become lighter and she went from braids to lacefronts.

Posted 07 Aug 2008 at 2:04 pm ¶
Jasmine wrote:

This is bull. As an 18-year-old black girl, this skin color crap is freakin exhausting to deal with. I am sooo tired of feeling like while I’m a part of this world, I’m still somehow lesser than others because of my skin color. And to see this perpetuated in the media is just sickening. I’ve dealt with it the best I can but after awhile I get sick of rolling my eyes and being apathetic. I’m totally fed up.

This ad is beyond irritating. (And I’m so tired of seeing Beyonce anyway. At this point, she just totally bores me - I used to really like her.)

Posted 07 Aug 2008 at 2:07 pm ¶
Phil Deeze wrote:

Jessica Alba, Jessica Simpson, Beyonce, and Paris Hilton all seem to have (in magazines) the same shade of light orangey/beige thing going on.

What is up with that?

Posted 07 Aug 2008 at 2:10 pm ¶
RJG wrote:

It’s a clear photoshop, but I’m extremely interested in seeing the pre-preproduction work on the photograph.

I’m wondering if it was a blanket [/lazy?] lightening of a darkly shot image, or an attempt to bring more color out of the hair product itself resulting in her skin being lightened as well, or what.

100% not saying that it’s okay to whitewash someone, intentionally or otherwise, and for all I know an art directly really was going “can you make her a bit less ethnic?” (which I have heard although possibly not as much as Black Canseco), but I’m wondering if her skin lightening was done because of her skin tone or if it was done because of careless image correcting.

Of course, either way there’s an obviously huge disaster going on involving beauty standards, racial standards, and all that other lovely marketing madness.

I would just really like to see the original photograph as well (like what they did with the Faith Hill Redbook cover) to see how it should have looked.

Posted 07 Aug 2008 at 2:17 pm ¶
TierList E wrote:

You know I honestly don’t get the purpose. Because the men that hate on women for being dark, the “masses” that media keeps referring to (re: white) that hate on black women, do so no matter how white she looks. I’ve seen it, in videogames and in celebrities. All she needs to be is “pinged” as a black woman, and that’s all they need to start the “ugly black woman” tripe. Her nose can be straighter than theirs, toting anti-gravity DDs, small hips and flat butt but they still call her less than than the lighter than tan blondes, because some guy somewhere called her black.

I’m sure there are some guys who’d be turned off and/or insulted by looking at . . .too? black woman, but I’m sure they’re a smaller minority than those who are “white (or asian?) or nothing” and those who don’t really care either way. The only situation where “color” may have more sway if they were catering to minority men; I don’t know if white men are that nuanced.

Posted 07 Aug 2008 at 2:19 pm ¶
JD/ formerly J wrote:

@Myles…I am so over the racial aspect. I know they darken Obama to frighten white people (you know cos Dark skin is the boogie man). Now they have lightened Beyonce to sell weaves…sorry my bad..I mean hair dye. I am just soooo used to it that it is like whatever to me…

At this point I am looking at the ad as what happens to your hair if you dont deep condition and mositurise your ends…you know it looks like straw…..

Posted 07 Aug 2008 at 2:22 pm ¶
JD/ formerly J wrote:

@ Tiffany

I am not even married and I spend my time plotting how to keep my imaginary children from all media cos that stuff will make them crazy…I wonder…. do they have shrinks for little Black girls who have been soo abused by media images that they hate themselves…or maybe medication…cos it looks like a whole bunch of our children will be needing it…

Posted 07 Aug 2008 at 2:28 pm ¶
Cynthia wrote:

Black Canseco:

I guess if enough people refuse to drastically photoshop an image and enough people get fired, companies may finally get the message….or not.

C

Posted 07 Aug 2008 at 2:44 pm ¶
Joseph wrote:

Oh shit.

Somebody get Beyonce a glass of water, she doesn’t look well.

Posted 07 Aug 2008 at 2:52 pm ¶
Tara Betts wrote:

There have been countless ads where they make the celebrity lighter than they actually are. I’m just surprised that it took people this long to notice. It seems like it goes hand in hand with people lightening their hair too. They’ve done it with lots of Black and Latina spokesmodels like Daisy Fuentes and Tyra Banks.

Posted 07 Aug 2008 at 2:59 pm ¶
Black Canseco wrote:

The ad/pr/marketing industries are roughly 90% white male and white female dominated, with many are stunning biased against ethnic men and women. Despite that they can be surprisingly practical.

In short, they do what works. Don’t get me wrong a good 3/4ths of the clients and marketers believe in this Beyonce Dynamic–lightening, anglo-sizing everything/everyone–and would do it regardless. But the fact that it’s profitable only makes it that much more tempting.

For all the periodic, sporadic outrage people express, folks will go right back to doing it. Women aren’t canceling their magazine subscriptions en mass. No one’s flushing their hair products or makeup. No one’s gonna march or even write letters on this one.

We’ll blog, we’ll rant, we might even ask our friends if they heard about the story, but i’m guessing this will be old news by 5pm eastern time.

And tomorrow morning the ad agencies and media outlets will get back to biz as usual which includes doing stuff like this.

Posted 07 Aug 2008 at 3:04 pm ¶
jvansteppes wrote:

I’m also curious about the darkening of 50 cent that Black Canseco has raised here, especially in contrast to the lightening of Will Smith, America’s favorite black actor. This says a lot about how black masculinity is mediated down to the very pigment shade by these industries. Can they do this for film too or just still pictures?

Posted 07 Aug 2008 at 3:19 pm ¶
JD/ formerly J wrote:

@Black Canseco

I understand that it is futile but I still believe in being a one woman crusade. I wont be using L’Oreal anytime soon. It is time I checked out something else. Will it change anything…Of course not but at least I will feel better….They will not be getting my $12. Besides hair dye is damaging anyways…Check out the split ends on that weave….lol

Posted 07 Aug 2008 at 3:32 pm ¶
Black Canseco wrote:

jvansteps

It’s done all the time. Start hanging around actors and casting agents and you’ll notice it more than when it’s just someone famous, which is when most folks tend to be aware of it.

I’ve done enough photoshoots and commercial work that i’m not longer stunned by the fact that the actor we hire will look totally different from what ends up in the magazine/on the TV screen.

My experience is that the beauty game affects more talent of color than white talent.

Most darker skinned or heavie- set ethnic models/actors just don’t get call-backs because they’re “not universal enough”; so you’re stuck with a “less ethnic-looking” pool to begin with. If Denzel Washington were any darker, he’d had Don Cheadle’s career.

Angela Bassett can’t get arrested, but we hype up Helen Mirren as a marvel of beauty at age 63. Saana Lathan is twice the talent that Halle Berry is, but she’s also like 3 shades darker. Not a knock on Halle Berry, but i’ve spent over 15 years listening to white media execs and clients and colleague act as if Tyra Banks and Halle Berry are the only women of color that are pretty enough to cast.

Posted 07 Aug 2008 at 4:10 pm ¶
waxghost wrote:

jvansteppes, I read recently that Keira Knightley is angry that her chest has been digitally enhanced in some of her movies, so I would guess that yes, skin color changes happen in movies too.

Posted 07 Aug 2008 at 4:17 pm ¶
rosmar wrote:

“The ad/pr/marketing industries are roughly 90% white male and white female dominated”

Since women of any color only make up 3% of the executive positions of big marketing companies, I don’t think the “white female dominated” is accurate.

The rest of your post I agree with, at least until more of us start actually working for change.

Posted 07 Aug 2008 at 4:28 pm ¶
locked wrote:

i think the thing that throws me off really is just the nose. i think that’s why she is most unrecognizable, it doesn’t look like her nose.

i think that Beyonce is pretty light in the first place, and then once you add the fresh dyed light hair and get a close up like that, she’s going to look as light as possible!!

i think that they worked on those nose, but who knows. i’ve seen paparazzi shots of beyonce and she often loooks that light sometimes

Also, I think that picture posted of her with a darker skin toned, really looks like a tan.

YES color people tan too!

Posted 07 Aug 2008 at 4:38 pm ¶
Natalie wrote:

http://www.eonline.com/uberblog/b22634_lor233al_we_didnt_lighten_beyonc233.html?sid=rss_topstories&utm_source=eonline&utm_medium=rssfeeds&utm_campaign=rss_topstories

According to E! Online (link provided above) L’Oreal denies lightening Beyonce’s skin. Its possible they could be telling the truth. Photographers do use quite a bit of lighting during professional shoots which can make a lighter skinned person look golden… (its happened to me in a few instances, I appear lighter than I actually am) however her eyes are B-A-N-A-N-A-S! The insanity needs to stop. I get trying to make your product stand out but this is so over the top. L’oreal needs to admit that someone in their camp got a little to photoshop happy. Admitting the mistake is the first step…. the next step is getting rid of this entire ad campaign.

Posted 07 Aug 2008 at 4:49 pm ¶
Vanessa wrote:

The photos you guys posted when she is darker…she is wearing makeup…obviously used some tanning products to make her look darker.

This is her without makeup and she is pretty fair:
http://www.celeblook.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/01/image-thumb13.png

http://www.hotornotbeauty.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/05/beyonce-march-6.jpg

http://i122.photobucket.com/albums/o267/mwzadotcom/bey3000.jpg
(she’s wearing some lipgloss, eyeliner, and mascara)

http://beyonce.celebden.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/02/beyonce-2.gif

If you want to do an adequate comparison…than compare her without makeup…not when she is obviously using tanning products.

Posted 07 Aug 2008 at 5:23 pm ¶
Torontonian wrote:

Honestly, I immediately recognized it was Beyonce, although an obviously digitally-lightened Beyonce. Beyonce usually looks like that on magazine covers.

Posted 07 Aug 2008 at 5:35 pm ¶
Squidfly wrote:

Where’s Beyonce’s voice in all this? She bears some responsibility.

Posted 07 Aug 2008 at 6:09 pm ¶
Rob wrote:

This just got even more interesting. L’oreal is now saying they didn’t lighten her skin. If they didn’t I like to know what they did.

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5i6Ej8ygXK_Db4ac-LLUdLSBFGEtQD92DJNKG0

Posted 07 Aug 2008 at 6:41 pm ¶
Black Canseco wrote:

Rosmar,

You’d be surprised by the homogeneous make-up of advertising, marketing and PR agencies as well as the marketing departments of Fortune 1000 companies. The numbers of Black, Hispanic and Asian males and females is still stunningly miniscule. I’ve seen it first hand since about ‘92. Conversely, depending on the discipline (think PR and Advertising and branding) the numbers of white females on staff and in power positions is pretty solid. I’ve never worked at, for or with companies that didn’t have at least 40% female (white female) representation and at least 25% in power positions–managers, supervisors, execs.

I bring this up because we often assume “women” means all women. But it seldom does. And nowhere is that impact felt more than in advertising, PR marketing and media communities.

“Women” call a lot of shots and “Women” will look at Angela Bassett, Saana Lathan, INSERT ETHNIC WOMAN HERE and choose to either anglo-fy the crap out of them or overlook them all together in favor of someone who has a more “universal look”.

The pressure you’re under as an ethnic marketer /talent in the industry is to go along with this paradigm and wait your turn or not work at all.

When it comes to the fashion/beauty industries, which i’ve worked in, you’re still talking about people who separate “flesh tone” from “ethnic tone” and “natural hair” from “ethnic hair as if “flesh” = “white” and “natural”=”straight/anglo”.

it’s about what the “norm” is and who sets the norm.

Posted 07 Aug 2008 at 7:52 pm ¶
TierList E wrote:

@person to may/may not see this-

Ha, some person randomly went on my blog to tell me that they didn’t understand my comment . . .okay. So I’ll clarify here.

I don’t know how right I am, but I just feel that as I’ve seen it more people fall into “black women all look like X and are never attractive to me” in which I think they’re more turned off by the notion of a black woman than anything else, than those who are “well, I’ll take a black woman as long as I can ignore it”. I’ve ran across both opinions- the first one seems more common in to me, especially by majority men.

Posted 07 Aug 2008 at 11:17 pm ¶
Grace wrote:

I highly doubt Beyonce has as much integrity as you’re giving her credit for Cheryl Lynn. She doesn’t seem to be particularly smart if you’ve ever heard her speak. And the fact remains that ever since Destiny’s Child became 3, she’s been growing steadily whiter (did anyone see that Pink Panther video she did? Ash blonde wig?) And that House of Dereon mission statement? She’s really trying to pick up this whole creole imagery and run with it, and it’s so obvious. This doesn’t surprise me at all. And you’d better believe these women DO have a say-so in how they look in their shoots. I really don’t think she’s a victim at all.

Posted 08 Aug 2008 at 12:05 am ¶
well... wrote:

I have to add to the chorus here and say that Beyonce doesn’t look so different in that ad. First of all, it is obvious that L’oreal airbrushes the hair in all their haircare ads…it never looks natural at all. And wasn’t Beyonce’s mom a hair stylist? I’m sure Beyonce’s been rocking long silky hair for a long time. Anyway, Beyonce is quite light skinned, her eyes are very light as well. The album cover pic you provided is pretty much the same skin and hair color as the loreal ad, with the additionof really dramatic eyeliner. She looks much darker than usual in the the bottom picture you provided for contrast. Of course there is some airbrushing here, all beauty ads are airbrushed, but Beyonce does not look significantly lighter-skinned in the ad. Her hair is a bight more golden and lighter than usual, but that’s not that big of a deal, it’s a hair color ad for god’s sake. I think this was a misfire: Yes her image was altered, but not so drastically. Beyonce is very light skinned. Look at Halle Berry’s Revlon ads and Eva Longoria’s L’oreal ads and then give me a call, ok?

Two points:
1. “masai senegalese”: i’m sorry to be a nerd but the masai (in East Africa) live on the opposite part of the continent from Senegal (West Africa). There is no such thing as “Masai senegalese people”.

2. Daisy Fuentes: Daisy Fuentes is a very light skinned Cuban-American woman. She is practically white. Like most light skinned celebs, she probably sports a tan most of the time. I don’t see why anyone would need to significantly lighten her skintone in ads. Maybe you’re confusing Daisy with someone else?

Posted 08 Aug 2008 at 1:01 am ¶
stella wrote:

Didn’t she have the same issue with Vanity Fair couple years ago. L’oreal (I could be wrong)sells skin lighteners in Asia. The company that sells Dove products in the US sells skin lighteners in Asia. These companies are not subtle about their message in Asian countries i.e.light skin brings you a husband or financial success.

Posted 08 Aug 2008 at 1:41 am ¶
ccch wrote:

@ black Canseco It stands to reason for me that white women dominate these positions of authority in the fashion industry. Why else would other races of women be so infrequently used or altered so blatantly?. I can imagine I’d do the same thing, promoting my ideal of beauty (that embodies more me) than others, brainwashing all to believe in that beauty standard. It’s what we females do best. We can’t help but compete on that superficial level…………..

Posted 08 Aug 2008 at 3:57 am ¶
Horserider wrote:

Black Canseco wrote:
In short, they do what works. Don’t get me wrong a good 3/4ths of the clients and marketers believe in this Beyonce Dynamic–lightening, anglo-sizing everything/everyone–and would do it regardless. But the fact that it’s profitable only makes it that much more tempting.
For all the periodic, sporadic outrage people express, folks will go right back to doing it. Women aren’t canceling their magazine subscriptions en mass. No one’s flushing their hair products or makeup. No one’s gonna march or even write letters on this one.

I think the media has created a product which worked one day, and they refuse to make any efforts to discover if there are other tastes out there (than the ultra white/near white as possible) that can catch on with the masses. That is the problem. Because it was identified as a taste doesn’t mean it is the only taste, also is it really a taste or a created one (anorexic models).

The media is being disingenuous in claiming to be only giving us what we want, they broke us into fondness for characters and types in the first place, by clever angles, clever assigning of roles. They also perpetuate the masses expectations by never straying from the formula and typecasting.

The masses are like children, once they have a fondness for a food (the media cooked ands served it in the first place) it’s all they want to eat and they need a little ‘help’ to discover a broader range of foods which is healthier for them. The masses are also undiscriminating and why should they be deep thinkers about angles, backgrounds and lightning.

Media is part of the conditioning. Brunettes were in vogue at one point i.e. Vivienne Leigh. Then came the blonde bombshell and somehow we haven’t seemed to have logically progressed from this point. It might be narcissism and racism combining to keep us at this ultra white point since 90% of media casters are white.

The media and Hollywood, has become lazy, risk shy, and reluctant to continue on to the next phase in the evolution of the beauty image, but have settled on the ultra white female. Yes a darker female might receive a knock back from the public for the first moment but that speaks of the very effective conditioning imparted by 40 years of the same ‘diet’. It will take a creative approach and the willingness to back the idea of reconditioning!

Media is part of the conditioning and they don’t want to recondition us. That’s what this is about!

Posted 08 Aug 2008 at 5:12 am ¶
RoslynHolcomb wrote:

What I don’t get is why they don’t simply hire someone who looks the way they want them to look. Presumably there’s a zillion models out there who look like the ‘modified’ Beyonce. Why not simply hire one. Same thing with Keira Knightley. She’s a skinny, flat-chested woman. If you want a bosomy woman, why not simply hire one?

Posted 08 Aug 2008 at 7:04 am ¶
red wrote:

L’Oreal = racist. Basically the company doesn’t like people who aren’t white. So it either cuts them out completely - see this link:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2007/jul/07/france.angeliquechrisafis

Or it does what it has done to Beyonce, to get her in line with the company’s required colour.

Posted 08 Aug 2008 at 7:17 am ¶
red wrote:

@Black Canseco (23)

That is, unless we’re talking “urban chic” or “exotica” in which case they get what I call the Dark Continent Treatment where their skin is darkened and they’re made to wear stupid trinkets and outfits that make Masai Sengalese tribesfolk go, “WTF?!”

I know what you mean about “the Dark Continent Treatment”, where advertisers or whoever revert right back to some spear-carrying-black-person racist stereotype from some centuries ago.

But it’s also important to think about the generalisations and imagery used in the media about people from Africa today. So I think it’s worth avoiding phrases like “Masai Sengalese tribesfolk”.

Maasai people are usually from Kenya or Tanzania in East Africa. Senegal is a country in West Africa, a very long way away - it’s a big continent. And it is not helpful to refer to people from Africa as “tribesfolk” when that is not the terminology you would use about members of particular ethnic groups or holders of specific nationalities elsewhere. I don’t think you meant it this way, but somehoe the “tribesfolk” phrase had a bit of “dark continent treatment” about it.

Posted 08 Aug 2008 at 7:38 am ¶
red wrote:

Oops. I meant ‘but somehow the “tribesfolk” phrase…’

*wins worst typo of the week award*

sorry about that.

Posted 08 Aug 2008 at 7:40 am ¶
HighJive wrote:

L’Oréal strongly denied tampering with Beyoncé, and technically, they are probably being honest. Anyone who has ever produced fashion advertising or fashion photography (Yes, I have!) will attest that lighting plays a key role. In photography for hair, incredibly strong lights are used to make every strand visible and shiny. For example, a lot of commercials for products like Pantene or Clairol often show the back of women’s head for two reasons: 1) to display the long, shiny hair and; 2) to avoid having the person’s face completely “blown out” (or whitewashed) by the lights. Given that L’Oréal is selling a hair highlighting product, they likely were using a ton of lights. Unfortunately, L’Oréal wound up stepping on a cultural landmine, and ultimately displayed their cultural cluelessness. They should have worked harder with their lighting to compensate for a Black woman (companies that specialize in Black hair care are much more savvy about things like lighting). And they should have looked closer at the image to realize the potential issues. My net opinion: While they were not deliberately being sneaky or evil, L’Oréal was not professionally sensitive enough in this scenario. Despite being headquartered in Paris—a place boasting forward thinking—the company is culturally clueless.

Posted 08 Aug 2008 at 9:33 am ¶
Barbara B. wrote:

Red said-
“But it’s also important to think about the generalisations and imagery used in the media about people from Africa today. So I think it’s worth avoiding phrases like “Masai Sengalese tribesfolk”.”

I read that to mean *making* the Masai into Senegalese tribesfolk by putting the Masai into the traditional wear of the Senegalese people. I took it to mean that the advertisers/media don’t know or care about the difference. That black Africa is all of a piece to them. I could be wrong though.

Posted 08 Aug 2008 at 9:46 am ¶
Angel H. wrote:

I see possibly similar effect happening in fanart depiction of brown WoC.

“Now, I want to depict this character, but I also want her attractive . . .oh, I know, let me just scrub off all that extra melanin! Now she’s hawt!”

That stopped me from asking for fanart requests quick.

I’m not that into fanart so I’ve never noticed this. Have you seen it in any particaular fandoms or is it usually with fanart in general?

*gone to look up some fanart…

Posted 08 Aug 2008 at 10:07 am ¶
Renee wrote:

@HighJive…yeah I am not buying that they didn’t tamper with her image…What happened to her nose then? This is obviously photoshopped and denying it makes me that much more angry.

Posted 08 Aug 2008 at 10:25 am ¶
Kenny wrote:

Disturbing but not surprising.Someone asked why don’t they just use what they want and hire a lighter model? Umm… first they benefit from the star power of a Beyonce. They can also claim to hire minorities. The Cleveland Playhouse was criticised a few year ago for not producing any minority themed plays in years.So they put on “To Kill a Mocking bird” which had three small Black roles and boasted of it.
If you are surprised at how Beyonce looks on the photo ,think about this : with the exception of “Selena” (a true story) and “Maid in Manhatten”(in which she played a Maid) Jennifer Lopez has passed for White in all of her movies.

Posted 08 Aug 2008 at 10:38 am ¶
TierList E wrote:

@Angel H

Well, in my experience the chances of it happening is fairly consistent throughout most fandoms. I’m closest the DOA fandom now-

There’s Lisa ( http://doa.mylivepage.com/image/257/2180_lisa08.jpg) that more or less averages to that shade of brown officially (I’ve seen slightly lighter and darker versions).

People who fan draw pull out huge creative licenses on her skin tone . . .I was going to put in another link but someone somewhere must’ve heard my wrath, because they’ve disappeared off of google. And I’ve seen more brown picture of her! Nice. If you google her you’ll see a couple of what I’m talking about but they’re, um, not remotely job friendly.

http://img208.imageshack.us/img208/3482/untitled1pm.jpg

There’s a decent example. She the red head on the left. The usually suspect pictures I’d show to friends and the like also looked liked the came from a manga/doujin standpoint. American counterparts did a bit better but she still stays in her lighter ranges (though not markedly out of canon).

Posted 08 Aug 2008 at 10:46 am ¶
HighJive wrote:

Renee,

I believe they tampered with her image in the ways all fashion and beauty images are tampered with (smoothing lines and wrinkles, fixing blemishes, etc.). I also believe they were viewing Beyoncé through White beauty standards versus Black beauty standards; hence, they didn’t see that it was messed up—at least to non-White audiences. Do I think they gave her a nose job? Hard to say. They definitely picked an angle that makes it weird. Don’t get me wrong. I think L’Oréal blew it. I’m just not convinced they were deliberate in their actions. Just ignorant and culturally clueless. Although maybe such distinctions don’t matter given the final results.

Posted 08 Aug 2008 at 11:28 am ¶
EvilAngelfish wrote:

I find this ad surprising because even if Beyonce’s natural tone is this fair, many of us are used to seeing her looking a bit more brown. Compare the ad (or many of her recent album covers) with the cover of The Writing’s On The Wall. Even if it’s all down to makeup and bronzer, that would suggest that when Beyonce was just one member of an R&B quartet, her stylist wanted her to look more brown but as she became more mainstream, it was okay for her to drop that image and adopt styling/makeup that matched her natural skin tone. I’m not sure if I buy that. If you look at the album covers alone, it’s clear that as Beyonce has become more popular, her complexion has been shown to be lighter and that is a disturbing trend, no matter what her actual skin tone is.

Posted 08 Aug 2008 at 11:33 am ¶
Tarah wrote:

I thought it was J-Lo…

@Monie : ROFL. Yes, I’m sure he is!

Posted 08 Aug 2008 at 1:27 pm ¶
Black Canseco wrote:

For what its worth, my “masai sengalese tribesfolk” was meant as a joke. it’s how we see anyone from subsaharan africa–as just one amorphous, dark, them, probably not terribly cultured or sophisticated beyond assembling in groups somewhere. That even they would see the absurdity of the way they’re portrayed..

that and the fact that i thought i’d deleted “sengalese” and meant to say Masai Tribesfolks” since we he such a fetish and fascination with African tribal life but not enough to portray it/them beyond the occasional “national geographic” angles.

Posted 08 Aug 2008 at 2:34 pm ¶
Prometheus wrote:

When I first saw this, I had no problem discerning that this was in fact, Beyonce. She looks like Beyonce in every other picture. If you’re concerned about the lightness of her skin, please take it in context (the lightness of her hair AND the background of the included pictures). I mean, look at her mother’s complexion!

Posted 08 Aug 2008 at 5:37 pm ¶
Ending Racism wrote:

Black students have asked why white adoptive families feel act like “they know it all,” as if these white adults were the white saviors of the world.

Even little non-white children sense the relationship between the white adult and non-white child as a master-subordinate relationship.

This is addressed in”Losing Isaiah” where the struggle between white adults and minority children are presented.

Non-white children also face racist adults who attack the intelligence of non-white kids and affirmative action. The University of Michigan is one school that declared that non-whites children were unworthy of entering college through affirmative action.

Posted 08 Aug 2008 at 7:29 pm ¶
EndingRacism wrote:

The root of this “lighter is better” phenomenon is white supremacist beauty standards.

Has anyone noticed that Anti-Racist Parent website deletes important information when you mention “racist whites”? It’s really disturbing how they do that because they are trying to candy coat what whites do.

There are many white racists in educational systems that attack affirmative action and resent Asian and black students. The Bell Curve is a book that openly proclaims that non-whites are less intelligent. Universities are knocking down affirmative action, curtailing diversity for non-whites who have less opportunities.

White racists never take responsibility for their actions. They persist in blaming non-whites.

That’s why America prefers the word “diversity” instead of “race” in conversations even though non-white kids are categorized by race.

Posted 08 Aug 2008 at 8:39 pm ¶
TierList E wrote:

Um, I’m possibly responding to a person’s whose comments have been kept out of this thread, and if that’s the case feel free to not let mine through if it’s continuing to the problem, but I just wanted to keep it away from my blog.

But I just wanted to say that I believed the issue was misinterpreted- I doubt people’s main beef is with beyonce and how she looks, but how the media deals with WoC; even the ones who are considered acceptedly black. I haven’t sensed any jealously or too much negativity towards beyonce’s existence in general.

Posted 09 Aug 2008 at 1:47 am ¶
Free wrote:

So L’Oreal claims that they didn’t lighten. But what about Beyonce’s nose? It looks different to me.

@Black Canesco - curly hair sells among the “quirky” oft younger set, and ethnic hair is seen as “making a statement” or a problem that just needs to be fixed.

Curly hair can also be seen as a problem that needs to be fixed. In ever country that I’ve been to (outside of the U.S.) where I’ve visited a beauty parlor they always want to straighten my hair. And oh, the disappointment when I’ve said no to their blow dryers and ceramic hair straighteners. But you need some style, some fashion I’d be told. And the incredulous looks when I let them know that I love my curly hair and that straight hair is boring.

Posted 09 Aug 2008 at 1:51 am ¶
yvette wrote:

You guys should see the comments on TMZ. Wow. There are +480 racist comments about this ad on there. (They’re all from white people, too. I can tell.)

Posted 09 Aug 2008 at 12:08 pm ¶
Michelle wrote:

@78. I am not sure what this has to do with the discussion, but I am curious to know what it has to do with Beyonce being lightened in this ad.

I don’t know how many people saw the opening ceremony of the Olympics but did you notice that there weren’t many “natural” hair styles. Most of the Black American athletes are rocking weaves, or braids or relaxers. Many of the women from African and Caribbean countries also had similar hairstyles. Now, I know that having “natural” hair in an of itself doesn’t signify much. But, on the world stage when we see a sampling of women from around the globe and we notice a specific trend amongst women from the Black African diaspora, I can’t help but be startled. How complicit are Black women in the process of lightening Black women, weaving Black women, straightening Black women, thinning Black women? Is it a chicken or egg thing? Do Black women take out the weaves, and ditch the relaxers and push for an acceptance of who Black women are? Or do BW do the best to assimilate and hope that BW can live with the clear and dominate message that who BW are is simply not good enough. In fact, it is the polar opposite to real beauty.

For the record, I recognize that there are many European countries that have found Black women beautiful and desirable (probably a little fetishized, but that is another story). Still, I no longer find that the European stage is as open as it has been to the beauty of a Black woman.

Posted 09 Aug 2008 at 3:51 pm ¶
Nicole wrote:

To whom ever it concerns, Beyonce is not her mother’s complexion. She’s darker and it is a blatant marketing decision to make her lighter and fair haired. I personally think she’s prettier when she’s shown in her natural skin tone. This picture makes her look sick and peaky. Besides, why is it even necessary to make any person of color or white person “lighter” than they are?

Posted 09 Aug 2008 at 10:16 pm ¶
uu wrote:

I wonder if anyone would be willing to stop buying into these beauty mags that ads like these are found in extreme numbers.

I personally don’t waste my time with celeb gossip/beauty mags or “women interst” mags as they say at my Barnes and Noble job. Why should I bother buying those mags with women that don’t look like me hawking products that are not for me anyways?

I think they really are a waste of time and I think it is a conspiracy to have them selling (mainly I think as long as these kinds of mags exist, women will always be making less than men and will be content about it. Crazy, I know, but that’s how conspiracy theories can be.)

I cringe everytime I see a female waste her day reading those things. And it especially breaks my heart when I ring up a WoC like me and others buying them. That money could be used for something else, like gas or rent or feeding their kids. Even mags like essence don’t really help. ( I mean have you seen Black Hair Styles magazine? It looks just like long hair styles magazine but they photoshopped all the white, blonde haired females to have dark skin and dark colored hair.)

Posted 09 Aug 2008 at 11:29 pm ¶
uu wrote:

Continued: I mean seriously, you guys!!!! We’re so focused on advertising, telling us we’re too fat (in some classes too skinny), too dark (even not dark enough, read:tanning), not wearing the right clothes, the right make up, HAVING to have a man in your life and how to pleasure him just so he’ll stay with us. Does anyone know we do this to ourselves? Is it self-hate? Not enough love? It seems to me like its a form self-torture. What did we women do to have us punish ourselves?! What’s going on?!?!

And it starts out so young too. I challenge anyone to go to their local big box book store (walmart, barnes and noble, borders, walden) and check out the teen/young adult section and see the most popular books out.
At my store its the “Gossip girl,” “It girl,” and “cliques,” series, along with any teen book authored by Meg Cabot.

These books are filled with the problems of upper-class, white children looking to find a mate (because obviously, if you don’t land a boyfriend by 10th grade you’re gonna be screwed for the rest of your life), and get passed issues of keeping secrets that don’t really matter or could be resolved if taken to the proper authorities, end of story in a few pages.

There was a time when a customer, who was black, was looking for a teen book for his soon to be 14 year old son, who loved math. You can only imagine my nervousness because I couldn’t really think of anything, because the store didn’t have any thing. I decided to tell her the truth. my words: “well, as you can already figure out by looking in the teen section, all the books are either a. written by white women, b. for white girls, c. for girls in general, and d. not about math. Luckily, I found something we both agreed on was appropriate for him.

Posted 10 Aug 2008 at 1:02 am ¶
nicene42 wrote:

Airbrushing is just in the nature of the beast. The media has quickly become a social institution and therefore is nothing more than an outlet for the systemic inequalities and stereotypes of America.
I refuse to let the media define me. It is a daily challenge to be secure in my dark skin but some days are better than others.

Posted 10 Aug 2008 at 2:50 pm ¶
bdsista wrote:

Beyonce has been wearing lace front wigs for awhile, unless these are glued in weave tracks. There is definitely a problem here with the nose and eyes and skintone. To answer the question about weaves, being an active weave wearer in the entertainment biz. They give you options in terms of your appearance and aid in you creating, defining your persona. Not everyone looks good in a fro or dreads, or wants the committment of dreads. Braids can damage and pull your hair out. A lace front wig is glued over your hair to your skin and protects your hair. what color or style you get however is up to you and your (usually) chinese supplier.

Posted 10 Aug 2008 at 8:30 pm ¶
Ron wrote:

I think the best way to deal with this issue is for black women to acknowledge and recognize their own beauty. The number of times I have heard black women call other black women ugly or call a black woman ugly is countless.

If you do not believe in your own beauty do not expect magazines that only want your money to do it for you.

War is War whether hot or cold.

Posted 10 Aug 2008 at 11:54 pm ¶
Squidfly wrote:

Beyonce is paid millions by L’Oreal, it seems to bother her less than all the posters here, and that’s the point. She doesn’t care as long as “The Paper” keeps stacking in her bank account. It’s all about Money.

Posted 11 Aug 2008 at 8:37 am ¶
livininphilly wrote:

meant to add this on Friday but here’s my 2 cents:

didn’t even realize it was Beyonce till reading further on in the post. I thought it was Jessica Alba too. Beyonce get’s whiter everytime I see her. Every black public figure gets lighter.

@ Black Canseco: i would love to know more about this. I’m thinking it may be something I want to study in grad school.

aside: MLK Jr. also gets whiter & whiter everytime I see a pic of him. Pretty soon children won’t even be taught that he was a black man.

Posted 11 Aug 2008 at 9:43 am ¶
Prometheus wrote:

To 84, did you ever consider the fact that Beyonce may tan to appear more Black? Or that she extensively uses bronzers/tinted moisturizers to appear more Black cause judging from some of the comments here, we don’t feel she looks black enough.

I understand very well that this is a very sensitive topic and I’m going to have to agree wholeheartedly with nicene42 (comment 87). Airbrushing is simply part of the beast that is entertainment and is SIMPLY A REFLECTION OF THE ATTITUDES THAT EXIST. What has all this talk about this picture done? I have to believe very little, because we would rather attack major corporations over a photo than speak to each other consciously enough to examine all our own biases about what it means to Black or a WoC.

Wearing your hair natural does not make you any more Black or more in tune with your heritage than Justin Timberlake when he wore cornrows years ago at the VMAs. We really have to look at the battle of “what is Black” that is within all of us instead of making corps like Feria a scapegoat. They’re providing us with what we all tell them we want. We can continue to raise hell all we want about certain photos or songs or words, but it’s doing everyone little good if we aren’t having intelligent and open conversations on a day to day basis that challenge those assumptions of what it means to be Black.

Posted 11 Aug 2008 at 3:39 pm ¶
EvilAngelfish wrote:

@Prometheus
I agree that the color/texture/degree of straightness of one’s hair does not indicate one’s level of “blackness” and, given some of the comments on this post, it would seem that there is a lot of sensitivity around what it means to be black (i.e., is X too black? Not black enough? Trying to be white?, not to mention a lot of weave-bashing) and it is important for us to explore those issues, especially in a safe space like this.

I don’t question Beyonce’s (or anyone’s) blackness, especially not because of her complexion. It’s more like, “Oh, is she really that pale?” Because if she is, she covered it up pretty well for like, the first half of her career (until she broke out as a solo artist, perhaps?). I’m not sure how tanning or using makeup to appear more black than she naturally does would have helped her career. If that is, in fact, the case, do you think that it would have been to appeal to the traditional R&B audience or to the mainstream audience? After all, Kelly and Michelle, whose complexions are darker than Beyonce’s, haven’t been in any Loreal ads I’ve seen (although Kelly has been in ads for Dark & Lovely) and, talent-wise, I’d say they’re all about the same. Is Beyonce more popular because she’s a better singer? Because she’s prettier? Because she’s more marketable? If so, why?

Add to that the fact that it really isn’t uncommon for famous PoCs to have their images lightened/darkened in order to appeal to or to appear less appealing to the mainstream and we have something very peculiar that merits intelligent conversation as well.

Posted 11 Aug 2008 at 4:28 pm ¶
Michelle wrote:

bdsista,

I am also in the entertainment industry. I have a small closet dedicated to the weave hair, ponytails and wigs that I have amassed over my years in the business. So, trust, I get it. Weaves can change your look, blah, blah, blah.

But no one sees the connection between countless Black women who have NO IDEA what their natural hair texture even looks like and an entire beauty industry dedicated to the white ideal? No one, any one, some one? I guess I just feel like we do have to look at what we as Black women truly treasure and what we are willing to endure, and why. We can’t be truly outraged by others lack of recognition of our beauty when we have not fully embraced our own beauty and elegance.

Please don’t give me the “not everybody looks good in dreds or an afro” rationale. Do you know that there are THOUSANDS of natural styles between the extremes of dreds and afros? I am sure that you know that. And there are many Black women who have no clue what looks good on them because they have been straightening their hair their ENTIRE lives. I have also seen women look gorgeous with natural hair, who just feel so naked and exposed and unkempt that they just can’t even se how beautiful they look without the weave or relaxer.

I DO NOT think that having natural hair makes you more Black. Not at all! Having natural hair, in and of itself means nothing. It is just a trend, a style, a means of self expression. @92, you said, “Wearing your hair natural does not make you any more Black or more in tune with your heritage”. True, and I agree, at least on the surface. However, on a deeper level, I do see something upsetting about a woman who has no idea what her natural hair even looks like. And then we want to complain about why the rest of the world wants to lighten our skin. We have to look at the complexities of this issue and also look at ourselves and what are our priorities. Because there are generations of little girls who are still picking that white/light doll and grow up to be women who have to fight and claw to the depths of their psyche to find a measure of healthy self esteem.

Posted 11 Aug 2008 at 4:30 pm ¶
EvilAngelfish wrote:

To clarify an earlier point: Re: the theory that Beyonce would want to appear more black - I don’t think that Beyonce doesn’t appear in Dark & Lovely* ads because she’s not dark enough. I think it’s more likely that SoftSheen-Carson can afford to have Kelly (who happens to be dark and lovely) in their campaign while they can’t afford Beyonce, but huge companies like Loreal can.

*this might actually be Optimum…can’t remember.

Still drawing a blank on celebrities who have had to appear physically more “black” to increase their popularity…this does not hold true for the concept of acting “black”, but that’s a different thing altogether.

Posted 11 Aug 2008 at 4:45 pm ¶
Prometheus wrote:

EvilAngel and Michelle, I definitely agree. To EvilAngel, I think there COULD be something to be said about Beyonce making herself darker to appeal to a more ‘traditional’ R&B audience. After all, I’m sure she’s been dealing with haters all her life because of her complexion, beauty etc etc. Honestly, I think she just likes to go to the beach and lay out, which some people also feel is a “White” thing, but then again…here we go.

@ Michelle…I, too, think it’s a shame if someone doesn’t know what their natural hair looks like. If nothing else, it’s healthy just to experiment!

Recent Beyonce pics:

http://blacksnob.blogspot.com/2008/08/beyonces-michael-jackson-syndrome.html

Beyonce looks pretty light in these, especially in pics three and four and I’m pretty sure there’s no airbrushing here. Whether she is personally lightening herself or not, I think these photos say something to the criticism of the Feria ad…I’m just saying!

Posted 11 Aug 2008 at 4:49 pm ¶
Julia wrote:

@AngelH

I know Teyla from Stargate Atlantis has also been whitened. Someone did a photo manip where they lightened her skin and stuck her head on the body of a white woman. It was horrible. The “artist” claimed she was just “experimenting with skin tones” and it made Teyla look “prettier.”

This is what the actres who plays Teyla (Rachel Luttrel) looks like
http://content6.flixster.com/photo/10/07/11/10071124_gal.jpg

Posted 11 Aug 2008 at 8:12 pm ¶
Michelle wrote:

Lastly, speaking of what people in the industry do to their skin….

There are many facial procedures, glycolic peels, kojic acid peels, microdermabrasion, etc. that are designed to brighten skin. Many people in the industry get these treatments, not to lighten skin, put to produce that extra even skin tone. When I see pics of Beyonce, it is possible that over the years these treatments have affected her skin tone.

But more importantly, we have proof that “the industry” does lighten skin tones. We also have overwhelming proof that the industry values lighter skin and straighter hair, ultimately, Whiter people. It would be great if this incident sparked a nation wide movement away from, at the very least, ALL things L’oreal. And it began a discussion on how, as Black Conseco said “Now what”. Poignant to say the very least, Conseco.

Posted 11 Aug 2008 at 11:14 pm ¶
Marie wrote:

The African-American community is part of the problem and I’m amazed that no one else here is addressing this. Throughout the history light skin has been regarded as more beautiful by african-americans themselves. Unfortunately we don’t need white people to tell us that, we make a good job telling ourselves and each other that light skin is beautiful and dark skin is not. Talk about self-loathing. How very sad!

Posted 14 Aug 2008 at 3:32 pm ¶
afromania wrote:

How about this for a solution? Don’t let non-white children watch TV. Problem solved.

Posted 15 Aug 2008 at 1:50 pm ¶