Is white skin more "beautiful?"

From the Community…

• 
  Posted by Kamiesha Fri Jul 11, 2008 2:53am PDT

  Wow!? Regardless of what the "premise" of the commercial was, what it brings across is "lighter is better". But, I agree with some of the other comments, if there wasn't a demand for it, it wouldn't be here.

  Report Abuse
• 
  Posted by KNEE DEEP Fri Jul 11, 2008 3:03am PDT

  JUST SO YOU KNOW MICHAEL JACKSON HAS A SKIN DISEASE TURNING HIS SKIN WHITE BECAUSE OF LOSS OF PIGMENT. IF WHITE IS SO GREAT WHY DO WHITE WOMEN WANT TANS? SOME BODY EXPLAIN THAT TO ME PLEASE. BY THE WAY THERE IS ONLY ONE RACE ......HUMAN...BUT THERE ARE DIFFERENT NATIONALITIES.

  Report Abuse
• 
  Posted by balla Fri Jul 11, 2008 3:53am PDT

  dark skin is beautiful. but if is too dark is not. so i hope u all understand what am saying.

  Report Abuse
• 
  Posted by Evercurious Fri Jul 11, 2008 4:04am PDT

  I believe that what is really wrong with this add is the content, not necesserily the product. If a tanning lotion add showed a girl left by her Beaux and driven to use any product to alter her appearance that came naturally (maybe the guy was into dark hair and she was a natural blonde) in hopes to get the guy back, it would be just as deminishing to the woman's image.

  Report Abuse
• 
  Posted by KL Fri Jul 11, 2008 6:06am PDT

  And then all the pale white people like me spend hours and $$$.......................trying to get a dark tan.

  Go figure.

  I think you always want something your not.

  Report Abuse
• 
  Posted by Kitten Fri Jul 11, 2008 6:21am PDT

  This ad is so incredibly sad. As for the debate about lighter being better or why people tan; there are no winners in that one. If you have dark knees from sports (I do) I can understand using this product. Otherwise, it's just sad.

  If you want to get a tan, go for it. I don't care. Just don't walk up to a naturally tanned person, hold out your arm and shout, "Look, I'm as dark as you are." That's just inappropriate.

  Report Abuse
• 
  Posted by Disgruntled Fri Jul 11, 2008 7:04am PDT

  I've always thought that Indian women had the most beautiful skin. I can't imagine someone as gorgeous as the woman in the ad wanting boring white skin like mine. It's ridiculous that in order to be considered beautiful to a man, women are expected to go to ridiculous extremes like lightening their skin. This ad manages to be both sexist and racist at the same time.

  Report Abuse
• 
  Posted by Geo wife lady Fri Jul 11, 2008 7:18am PDT

  well I'm white as freek, maybe i should move to india, because i feel that amaricans have to opposite problem, we all have to get tanned and we have to embrace the darker skin tones. I grew up with hispanic friends who always talked about not being dark enough. and that last time i wore shorts in the summer i had a black lady ask me why my legs where so white, in a tone of voice that implyed that white was bad or that because i had white legs i was somehow "diseased"

  so i think the shaming a group of people into thinking they arent good enough in universal in the advertising world.

  I totally agree with the post by dudette...

  Report Abuse
• 
  Posted by Mysterious Gryphon Fri Jul 11, 2008 7:22am PDT

  Five hundred years ago, the wealthy women of Renaissance Italy wore specially-designed hats with ludicrously wide brims and no crown, so that they could spread their lemon-soaked hair out in the sun to be lightened while still protecting their delicate, fair complexions.

  The ideal of their day, as it was up until about sixty years ago, was to be as fair-skinned and fair-haired as possible, with blue eyes for an exotic touch. Nowadays, we have a wider conception of beauty, but as a direct result of that shift, women who do naturally conform to that old ideal are themselves marginalized.

  A fair-skinned woman is often told that she looks pale (read: unhealthy) and should consider the latest self-tanning product (or worse, a day at the tanning beds or beach). Woman are no longer told how lovely their blonde locks are, and are never allowed to indulge in the fantasy that "gentlemen prefer blondes" because this philosophy is so exclusive to natural brunettes, redheads, and women of other ethnicities besides Caucasian.

  Those same Renaissance women were presented with images like Boticelli's Venus as the ideal shape for the female body. It has been determined that that Venus (and many paintings and scuptures of the goddess and others from before 1900) would be 5'5" and 160lbs if she were a real woman. Yet today a woman who fits those proportions is called fat and encouraged to slim down in order to more closely resemble the anorexic likes of Keira Knightley and Renee Zellweger.

  I recently excited some contraversy on the debate over "boobs" by suggesting that there should be a greater variety of beautiful, sexy brassiers for women who are natually amply endowed. While I am sorry to hurt a smaller-chested woman's feelings, I still maintain that it is unfair that women to whom God has given beautiful, full breasts should have nothing pretty to put them in, while small-breasted women have every option for concealing their flatness.

  On one hand, I respect the current trend toward celebrating beauty in all of its forms; certainly there are beautiful women with dark skin, light skin, red hair, yellow hair, purple hair, curly hair, straight hair, tall and short, large and small. Yet when we tell women who fit into the traditional standard that they are obsolete, all we are doing is turning the old stereotypes against her - and this is unfair.

  After all, we still venerate Marilyn Monroe.

  Report Abuse
• 
  Posted by Just Nancy Fri Jul 11, 2008 7:54am PDT

  Personally, I envy the darker skinned beauties. And shame on me for saying this, but white "fat" looks a lot worse, than dark "fat".

  Shalom....

  Report Abuse