The
Absurdity of the “Dark is Beautiful” Campaign
I
In the Vijay starrer blockbuster
Gilli, the hero’s teenage sister
comes back home dark and sweating after a failed search mission of Aiswarya Rai
and Sachin Tendulkar in the hot sun. Her mother asks her: “Nee ennadi enginukku
kari alli potava maari vanthuirukka?” (Why do you look like one who has been
feeding coal to the rail engine?)
In a much recent horror
movie Kanchana, the hero falls in
love with the sister of his highly Brahminical accented Tamil speaking
sister-in-law. As the hero tells his sister-in-law of his liking to her sister,
she tells him, “Ava unna vida colour da” (She is fairer than you.)
II
In the past few weeks
like many others in this country, I too got emails asking me to sign a campaign
against Emami India and Sharukh Khan. A visit to the campaign page in Facebook told
a lot about the ideas associated with dark skin and the motivations of the
group.
In an interview Nandita Das, the celebrity
campaigner says, “Do you mean to say that there are no dark colored upper class
women?... Especially in mainstream you have to have woman who is fair” (www.desiyup.com
).
And this is precisely
why I think the “Dark is Beautiful” campaign is absurd. Most of the entries in
the fan page underscored that they have been ostracized for being dark; that
they have to work extra hard to prove their worth. And most significantly the
campaigners belonged to elite urban backgrounds.
While Nandita Das is
campaigning for the acceptance of dark skinned individuals, she is talking
within the limitations of an uppercaste/class highly successful woman who was
looked upon as dark and dusky despite her beauty and talent. In the same interview she says that dark
should be looked upon as beautiful and not an exception. The inherent flaw in
the campaign is the glossing over of discrimination based on caste, class,
region, and race as one associated with skin tone.
Take the case of Arpit Jacob for example. Arpit, a
native of Kerala, recounts his experience of studying in a school in North
India. In the school he was called Kalia (black) and haspi (negro). Because of
the ridicule he suffered, he says he joined a college in south India “where
there were more dark skinned people.” It is true that Arpit has been the butt
of ridicule in school for his skin color. But the real reason for being
ridiculed is the fact that he is a southerner and his skin color is different
from his northern class mates. It is no wonder that he felt comfortable in a
college in south India with like skinned people. Unfortunately in the article,
Arpit goes on to generalize on the effects of focusing on negativities in life
(darkisbeautiful.blogspot.in
).
Diya Paul, a communication professional recounts her
trauma of enduring her paternal grandparents’ mournful “ivvelevu karuppa porenthutaa (she
has been born so black!)” and her father’s anguished surprise that his daughter
is black despite a “fair like a foreign import or a North Indian” mother. Added
to this was the general disbelief in her circle that she could not have born
out of her biological mother. She says she even went on to ask her mother if
she was adopted or was there a goof-up of babies in the hospital (www.weekendleader.com/
www.Facebook.com/darkisbeautiful). While it is clear that the
author’s family and her circle are fair skinned people, we need to ask who the
dark skinned ones are.
In the “Dark
is Beautiful” fan page in Facebook, there is a vote to trace the origin of skin
color bias in India. Out of the four choices – caste system, British influence,
Cultural divide between the North Indians and South Indians, and Bollywood –
caste system has earned 36+ votes followed by cultural divide between North
Indians and South Indians with 27+ votes. Compared to this colonial influence
and tinseldom had earned only a negligible 6 and 8 vote. While the campaigners have indeed realized
the factors originating skin color bias and the followers have made it quite
evident through their votes, the campaigners have camouflaged caste and
regional bias as superficial a bias as skin color.
The Emami Fair and Handsome advertisement sought to
be withdrawn is viewed as spreading the message that one need not work hard
when their skin is fair. Well, the truth of the argument is beyond question. But
the difference is why is dark skinned detested? Why are dark skinned people
looked down upon? Hira Shah, professor of South Asian Studies, York University
points out the power and authority associated with the rulers in a colonial set
up and the evil doers as dark skinned in many of the Hindu scriptures (http://vimeo.com/16210769
). In the African- American context, colorism had its origin in the
condescending treatment enjoyed by children born out of “slaves and their white
masters” (abcnews.go.com
) who naturally had lighter skin. The bottom line of Professor Hira’s analysis
is that fairer skin means power, authority, and goodness. In the
African-American context it means privilege. Darker skin means the opposite.
The role of media, tinseldom in perpetuating the
fair-successful-beautiful-good equation is beyond doubt. On answering the charges of why Fair and
Handsome and why Sharukh Khan, Kavitha Emmanuel – founder Woman of Worth - says
that they have to start somewhere (darkisbeautiful.blogspot.in ). She also says that “This is not an attack on brands or brand ambassadors, but on
the toxic belief that only fair skin is beautiful" (www.Facebook.com/darkisbeautiful
). And
for this reason alone the credibility of the “Dark is Beautiful” campaign as
people’s movement is shaky. If the campaigners do not want to rub on the rough
side of powerful people, whose conscience are they trying to awaken? How will brands sell
fairness creams without putting forth the idea that fair is better?
In the Indian caste based structural hierarchical
society, is it not a fact that the lower you went the darker was the skin? Is
it not a fact that people in the south are darker than their northern
inhabitants? If you accept dark as beautiful, does it mean that there won’t be
discrimination based on these categories?
The hatred for dark skin tone arises out of a sense
of shame to resemble someone who you would look down upon and vice versa. The
campaigners without addressing the associations of the dark skin are merely
saying, “Look we have dark skin, but we are not like them.”
Nandita Das while acknowledging the presence of
caste and culture behind the obsession with fair skin thinks that “current
causes should be targeted first.” I cannot restrain from asking, when is the
right time to talk about caste and culture based color discrimination? It is
naïve to assume that caste and culture based bias will be forgotten if dark
skin is accepted as beautiful. It won’t be an exaggeration if I say even if the
dark skin is accepted as beautiful the question “whose dark skin?” will still
remain unanswered.
At the very minimum the campaign does not point out
that those who discriminate on skin color are showcasing caste and regional
superiority attitude. Without pointing out the reason I am not sure what the
campaigners aim to achieve. The campaigners never said, “See, you are being
casteist in the guise of color, you are being racist and so on.” Until there is
discrimination based on caste, class, region, and race there will be
discrimination based on skin color. Even thousands of “Dark is Beautiful” campaigns
will not eradicate it.
A campaign which willfully disengages with social
realities is only an elitist movement which need not be taken seriously. Unfairly,
the Bollywood glam-quotient has earned the campaign undue attention from world
over. At its present form the “Dark is Beautiful” campaign is usurping the
voices of those dark skinned people who have lesser means of overcoming the
bias to prove their talent. As Anjali Rajoria says, the campaign is one that of
“highly successful upper caste women who are protesting the loss of few more
lucrative mainstream opportunities due to their relatively darker skin tones” (http://www.dalitweb.org/?p=2039
)
References:
