Cosmopolitan article backlash is undeserved
Last week, the words “Cosmopolitan” and “racist” were hurled around in the same sentence.
In January, Cosmopolitan published an article on its website titled “21 Beauty Trends That Need to Die in 2015.” Initially, the article came and went, until it resurfaced on Twitter late last month. Cosmopolitan was accused of using women of color to illustrate the trends that “need to die,” and only white women to illustrate the new, fashion-forward beauty trends in a series of images titled “Hello Gorgeous.”
Though Cosmopolitan has not removed the article from its website, they have issued a public apology for any offense they might have caused, and — before perusing the article, readers are met with a statement reading: “A note from the editor: This article focuses on beauty trends with images that represent those trends. Some images have been taken out of context, and we apologize for any offense. Celebrating all women is our mission, and we will continue to work hard to do that.”
People have criticized the article as a blatant case of racism with the implication that ethnic diversity is out of fashion, but the issues raised are not so black and white. The article also used white women to embody the trends that “need to die.” In fact, out of the 21 condemned trends, fewer than 10 are portrayed by non-white women. Thus, the media’s focus on the diversity issue in this case misses the point.
The overall lack of diversity in the article, however, is certainly a mistake on the part of Cosmopolitan. As a publication with significant influence over young women and a central force in defining what we consider to be attractive, Cosmopolitan undoubtedly has a responsibility to promote diversity.
The title certainly doesn’t help its case- — “21 Beauty Trends That Need To Die in 2015” is a very aggressive way to start an article. Though a different title probably wouldn’t have stopped the backlash that has arisen, such a provocative title is going to catch people’s attention. It isn’t a far leap for readers to subconsciously equate this hostile language with Cosmopolitan’s attitude toward women of color, so that part is understandable.
But more significantly, the controversy took a long time to attract any attention. Several months elapsed before anyone made a comment on the lack of diversity in this article, then over a matter of days, it became headline news. Surely, if Cosmopolitan was as derogatory as many people are making it out to be, the issue would have garnered attention immediately. Indeed, the reaction on Twitter has been intense. On April 1, @KillioussBey wrote, “Boycott @Cosmopolitan this is downright disgusting.” This message was accompanied by a photo from the article. Even famous faces have chimed in on the controversy, with supermodel Joan Smalls, one of the faces sporting a trend that “needs to die” in the article, calling the article “tasteless” and unfollowed Cosmopolitan. Yet the wrath of this reaction directed at Cosmopolitan is disproportionate to the issue at hand. Yes, the article seemed to have targeted women of color, but it is not a callous example of racism in the modern age.
In the end, the issue is unresolved because at the center of this controversy is the lack of representation in the industry, not just in the magazine. There’s no doubt that Cosmopolitan should take a more active role in celebrating women of color in their articles, but there is a difference between systemic racism and an unintentional lack of diversity. At the end of the day, nobody should feel degraded or insulted because of their race. People should examine the entertainment industry as a whole before pointing their fingers at Cosmopolitan.
As racism continues to be a prevalent issue in American culture, it is more crucial than ever for the media to showcase the beauty of all people, no matter their race. It has to be acknowledged, however, that this issue points to the continuing lack of racial diversity in the fashion and entertainment industry as a whole. Therefore, this incident serves to showcase the need for greater diversity across an entire industry, as opposed to being an isolated incident of racism by one corporation.
The author’s title says the backlash is undeserved, even though the author spends most of this piece explaining how the Cosmopolitan article is indeed flawed for varying sorts of racist insensitivity. I think that’s basically what the backlash is all about. It seems that those who are complaining are suggesting that the Cosmopolitan article is another example of “the need for greater diversity across an entire industry”. There’s a lot of wavering back and forth in this piece but in the end it appears to me that the author agrees with the backlash far more than she disagrees with it.
All of that said, articles like this always serve to remind me how horribly confused most people are with the difference between “racist” and “racial”. Time and time again, this confusion is demonstrated, typically with political or selfish undertones. There is a critical distinction that is rarely understood. Actual racism is of course wrong and immoral by any decent person’s standards, not everything that has a racial component is racist. There are racial components to many things in life and society. Take illegal immigration for example. Identifying the fact that the majority of illegal immigration to U.S. is by Hispanics or Latinos is not racist. It’s simply identifying a racial component to the illegal immigration debate. Noting that engineering schools are filled with Asians, that airline pilots are typically caucasion, or that NBA basketball players are predominantly black… are all fair observations to be made. They identify racial components to the conversation at hand. Of course the accuracy of a comment can always be challenged, but it is unfair to target people or companies as “racist” when in fact a comment or article or conversation might simply be identifying racial elements. There’s a huge and important difference.
For full disclosure, I have not read the Cosmopolitan article at issue. However my guess is that there was nothing racist or insensitive about it. Cosmopolitan Magazine reports on fashion news and trends, and the fact is that many issues of fashion have racial components because people of certain ethnicity start them, or celebrate their culture through them. It’s not a good thing that open and sincere discussion can’t include racial components.