The blonde vs. brunette debate is not inclusive
People of color have suffered under constant pressure of Eurocentric beauty standards.
People of color have suffered under constant pressure of Eurocentric beauty standards.
Growing up in Bombay, India, I got used to seeing colossal billboards on every street corner boasting “Fair & Lovely” in big, bold letters, advertising a beauty product that claimed to lighten skin. While I never paid much attention to those billboards or the advertisements on my television, I knew that the product connoted that lighter skin was, well, “lovely,” and darker skin was not.
In a country that had many dark-skinned people, it was easy to see that the company that owned “Fair & Lovely,” Unilever, was profiting off insecurities perpetuated by Eurocentric beauty standards. The underlying assumption was that everybody wanted to be fairer and wasn’t comfortable in their darker skin. Eventually, the company received some well-deserved backlash, and after a petition signed by over 18,000 people, decided to change the name to “Glow & Lovely.”
I was perhaps six years old when I first came across a “Fair & Lovely” ad, but the idea of idealizing a European version of beauty has been a constant throughout my life and the lives of many other people of color. Whether it is stereotypes in films or everyday microaggressions, the implicit bias of lighter skin being more attractive is always present. Most recently, this discrimination has taken shape through the resurgence of the “blonde versus brunette” debate.
Now, don’t get me wrong — I know that people of color can have blonde and brown hair. However, the ethos of this trend — even though it is just meant to be a silly trend — is rooted in prioritizing whiteness. When asking someone whether they would rather date a blonde or brunette, people of color are not considered an option. Such questions don’t hold space for people of color, working under the assumption that they are unattractive.
Nia Kann writes on Medium that this automatically sidelines those who aren’t white. These trends and questions can ultimately lead to feelings of undesirability and questioning self-worth.
When discussing beauty, it is critical to examine whether we are centering the discussion around whiteness. On social media, filters that automatically change eye colors to lighter ones and lighten skin inherently assume that whiteness is the beauty standard.
And the blonde versus brunette trend isn’t the only one that has perpetuated such notions. Earlier this summer, the “What Race Would You Not Date” trend went viral on TikTok. The responses in the most viewed videos included answers such as “Indians, because of the way that they look.” Once again, this answer boils down to Westernized beauty constructs.
India, for example, is exceedingly diverse, and not everybody has the same features. However, when all ethnic features are deemed undesirable, it is a result of white features being idealized. While having a type is quite normal, stating that one would not date an entire race due to prejudices perpetuated by Western media is, at its core, racist. Other videos under this trend include answers such as Asians or Somalians, and the reasoning is always embedded in racial stereotypes.
When such beauty standards are fueled from a young age, it can make people of color feel as if they need to change their appearance or that there is something wrong with their features. This can lead to them purchasing lightening creams and brightening serums, which are harmful to the skin. These feelings are only exacerbated when relationships and dating are added to the mix.
People of color have often tried to fit themselves into this Western ideal by elongating their eyes, straightening their hair and bleaching their skin, among many other processes that lead to the rejection of ethnic features and the prioritization of white ones. It can be difficult to believe that ethnic features are beautiful when the media is constantly imbibing the idea that they are not.
It is important to remember that there is, in reality, no one definition of beauty. It transcends race and cannot be contained into only one type of feature. People of color are, and have always been, beautiful.
We are the only independent newspaper here at USC, run at every level by students. That means we aren’t tied down by any other interests but those of readers like you: the students, faculty, staff and South Central residents that together make up the USC community.
Independence is a double-edged sword: We have a unique lens into the University’s actions and policies, and can hold powerful figures accountable when others cannot. But that also means our budget is severely limited. We’re already spread thin as we compensate the writers, photographers, artists, designers and editors whose incredible work you see in our daily paper; as we work to revamp and expand our digital presence, we now have additional staff making podcasts, videos, webpages, our first ever magazine and social media content, who are at risk of being unable to receive the support they deserve.
We are therefore indebted to readers like you, who, by supporting us, help keep our paper daily (we are the only remaining college paper on the West Coast that prints every single weekday), independent, free and widely accessible.
Please consider supporting us. Even $1 goes a long way in supporting our work; if you are able, you can also support us with monthly, or even annual, donations. Thank you.
This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies.
Accept settingsDo Not AcceptWe may request cookies to be set on your device. We use cookies to let us know when you visit our websites, how you interact with us, to enrich your user experience, and to customize your relationship with our website.
Click on the different category headings to find out more. You can also change some of your preferences. Note that blocking some types of cookies may impact your experience on our websites and the services we are able to offer.
These cookies are strictly necessary to provide you with services available through our website and to use some of its features.
Because these cookies are strictly necessary to deliver the website, refusing them will have impact how our site functions. You always can block or delete cookies by changing your browser settings and force blocking all cookies on this website. But this will always prompt you to accept/refuse cookies when revisiting our site.
We fully respect if you want to refuse cookies but to avoid asking you again and again kindly allow us to store a cookie for that. You are free to opt out any time or opt in for other cookies to get a better experience. If you refuse cookies we will remove all set cookies in our domain.
We provide you with a list of stored cookies on your computer in our domain so you can check what we stored. Due to security reasons we are not able to show or modify cookies from other domains. You can check these in your browser security settings.
These cookies collect information that is used either in aggregate form to help us understand how our website is being used or how effective our marketing campaigns are, or to help us customize our website and application for you in order to enhance your experience.
If you do not want that we track your visit to our site you can disable tracking in your browser here:
We also use different external services like Google Webfonts, Google Maps, and external Video providers. Since these providers may collect personal data like your IP address we allow you to block them here. Please be aware that this might heavily reduce the functionality and appearance of our site. Changes will take effect once you reload the page.
Google Webfont Settings:
Google Map Settings:
Google reCaptcha Settings:
Vimeo and Youtube video embeds:
The following cookies are also needed - You can choose if you want to allow them: