I was actually going to propose your point but the other way around- (i hope this doesnt make anyone angry, but feel free to refute me if you disagree) but I was wondering if maybe this fair skin obsession sprung about <b>because of a sense of internalised rascism?? </b>Perhaps, because of all our years of British colonialism, and white domination, and globalisation now, there was this sense of cultural inferiority amongst Indians toward thier Asian culture, and this brought about the perception that fair= more beautiful and superior, even when a very small percentage of the country is actually fair? I kind of got this from hearing stories about the way some black tourists are treated over there, especially in comparison with thier white skinned counterparts- but please tell me if you think I'm completely off the mark here.
[right][snapback]51396[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Do study this phenomenon not just in Indian context, but also, say, Brazil and South Africa. Perhaps your hypothesis will get tighter along with the problem's contextualization.
<!--QuoteBegin-Singhi Kaya+May 19 2006, 04:49 PM-->QUOTE(Singhi Kaya @ May 19 2006, 04:49 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->I don't see anyone getting angry at that. I think it's at least partially true ~ and some I think already have aired a similar openion. There is even a fancy term for the above in some circle~"slavish mentality".
Me personally thinks that above is true, but favouring white skin have deeper socio-psychological reasons than just 200 years of colonial rule. I think bias for the white skin in our society predates colonialism~who can tell?
[right][snapback]51399[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yeah thats another thing I'm trying to find out- whether this perception was actually around even before colonial rule- but from what ive heard, a lot of the goddesses and stuff were dark? And if you look at the really ancient myths etc. this perception isn't really evident at all. But then I remember reading something else about how the whole black=evil and white=purity view has always been around in most cultures, even in ancient Indian culture, so maybe the fair=superior perception was actually around even before the colonisation?
And also, I wonder if the bias for white skin is a more universal trend than i thought before? Perhaps even without all the white colonial rule and Aryan rulers etc it would still be prevalent? Because the majority of cultures around the world prefer a fairer complexion as an ideal of beauty, even the ones that haven't been colonised- maybe its not just brought about by specific social factors, but is also a cause of our biology? Something to do with our genetics and what we look for in a mate? For example, I read somewhere that fairness is almost universally preffered because its associated with infant like neonatal features that are generally seen as more healthy, and therefore a better quality in a mate as they would be more likely to produce offspring.
Thats basically what Im trying to do here with comparing the two countries- see if this ideal of fair skin is only based on ones cultural context and is completely malleable, or if its more universal and fixed, and to do with human biology. Or a combination of both, which is what I think it is.
05-20-2006, 09:14 PM (This post was last modified: 05-20-2006, 11:57 PM by agnivayu.)
First of all the Aryan invasion theory is a racist 19th century Euro opinion not based on fact. So, stating that higher caste is lighter skinned etc...in the Indian context is false, however it is true in the Portuguese construct in South America (caste or casta is a Portuguese word after all). I think in your quest to document fair skinned obsession in India, you need to study this globally. From my experience, East Asians are even more obsessed about light skin color, many Chinese people I know talk mockingly about dark skin color.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Yeah thats another thing I'm trying to find out- whether this perception was actually around even before colonial rule- but from what ive heard, a lot of the goddesses and stuff were dark? And if you look at the really ancient myths etc. this perception isn't really evident at all. But then I remember reading something else about how the whole black=evil and white=purity view has always been around in most cultures, even in ancient Indian culture, so maybe the fair=superior perception was actually around even before the colonisation?
And also, I wonder if the bias for white skin is a more universal trend than i thought before? Perhaps even without all the white colonial rule and Aryan rulers etc it would still be prevalent? Because the majority of cultures around the world prefer a fairer complexion as an ideal of beauty, even the ones that haven't been colonised- maybe its not just brought about by specific social factors, but is also a cause of our biology? Something to do with our genetics and what we look for in a mate? For example, I read somewhere that fairness is almost universally preffered because its associated with infant like neonatal features that are generally seen as more healthy, and therefore a better quality in a mate as they would be more likely to produce offspring.
Thats basically what Im trying to do here with comparing the two countries- see if this ideal of fair skin is only based on ones cultural context and is completely malleable, or if its more universal and fixed, and to do with human biology. Or a combination of both, which is what I think it is.
[right][snapback]51403[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I know I should study this in a global context rather than just Indian- but the truth is, its just too hard to do that at the moment. I need to have all these interviews and survey answers from my chosen countries, and India seems to be the only one where it would be possible for me to do that. and I will probably read up on the issue in other countries as well- just to get a wider perspective and more ideas, but the whole focus will have to be on India because its virtually impossible for me to get primary research from anywhere else.
I see this all the time in the media, where Indians are portrayed as somehow evil with a caste system, while all other people in the world are wonderful human beings. That's why it important to compare with these other countries that supposedly don't have these issues.
<!--QuoteBegin-elizag+May 22 2006, 12:42 PM-->QUOTE(elizag @ May 22 2006, 12:42 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->I know I should study this in a global context rather than just Indian- but the truth is, its just too hard to do that at the moment. I need to have all these interviews and survey answers from my chosen countries, and India seems to be the only one where it would be possible for me to do that. and I will probably read up on the issue in other countries as well- just to get a wider perspective and more ideas, but the whole focus will have to be on India because its virtually impossible for me to get primary research from anywhere else.
[right][snapback]51553[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-elizag+May 22 2006, 12:42 PM-->QUOTE(elizag @ May 22 2006, 12:42 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->but the whole focus will have to be on India because its virtually impossible for me to get primary research from anywhere else.
[right][snapback]51553[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Let me know what you want (from other counties), I can prvovide information (All from reputed journals and not newspapers or from social activists <!--emo&--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif' /><!--endemo--> )
<!--QuoteBegin-elizag+May 22 2006, 12:42 PM-->QUOTE(elizag @ May 22 2006, 12:42 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->but the whole focus will have to be on India because its virtually impossible for me to get primary research from anywhere else.
[right][snapback]51553[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Why would it be difficult for you to get data from other countries? It is primary data collection, isn't it, done over the internet? Why not log on to Latino, Japanese chinese, African-American forums and collect data?
The tendency to look up to 'white' skin is prevalent in most non-western cultures. Even in western cultures, until recent, the conception of beauty in many European countries, notably France and even UK, was a lily-white/ rose-peaches, complexion, kind of Nicole Kidman, pale-look. This was the look desired by atristrocracy and the upper-classes.
In Japan and China, the women would heavily powder their faces (even today, you'll find Japanese/chinese women 'whitening' their faces with powder) because a white (literally white because of the powder) complexion was deemed socially more acceptable. Even in Australia, there are still some people of European extract who like to keep a pale look, as it is considered more aristocratic/upper social class. They may be in the minority, but nonetheless, a good starting point for finding out the European origins for the desire for white complexion. Similarly, among Africans, a lighter skinned person was considered more higher in the social class ranking than one with heavily dark skin, and African features. While among African Americans this perception might go back to the times of slavery, for other parts of Africa, it relates directly to colonialism.
The problem is, your singular view point concentrating only on India and ignoring all other cultures, some of whom have greater obsession with skin color, will provide misleading perception that skin color is more of an issue in India than elsewhere. This couldn't be further from the truth. As usual, such short-sightedness, un-scientific research will only add to the pile of, what I'd like to call, exotic 'trash' literature on non-western cultures. Even though you are only in high school, it's never too early to start with objective research than producing another sensational literature. <!--emo&--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif' /><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteBegin-sankara+May 23 2006, 01:58 PM-->QUOTE(sankara @ May 23 2006, 01:58 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->The problem is, your singular view point concentrating only on India and ignoring all other cultures, some of whom have greater obsession with skin color, will provide misleading perception that skin color is more of an issue in India than elsewhere. This couldn't be further from the truth. As usual, such short-sightedness, un-scientific research will only add to the pile of, what I'd like to call, exotic 'trash' literature on non-western cultures. Even though you are only in high school, it's never too early to start with objective research than producing another sensational literature. <!--emo&--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif' /><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I'm not trying to create 'sensational literature'...if I find that this whole fair skin issue isn't really all that pervasive in India, then thats exactly what I'll state in my project. I doubt people are going to think that India has a much greater obsession with skin colour than all other cultures just because I chose to concentrate on it--the markers, and anyone else who reads it, will hopefully realise that I have narrowed it down to a singular country because of my cultural background, and because one of one the main requirements for this study- it has to be really specific, which I why I focus on only the issue of the fair skin, and why I chose to compare only two countries, rather than many other different countries worldwide.
And despite what you may think, it is extremely difficult for me to collect primary research from all these countries that you talk of- at least the amount of primary research that is necessary to draw reasonable conclusions from, in the very limited time period I have. Sure, I can go on to databases and websites like this, but their usefulness is limited, especially when it comes to the area of in-depth interviews, while in India all I have to do is make a phone call to a relative or friend and have a discussion about it. By focusing on India, I am also able to include my own personal observations and experiences that I cant do about any other country.
Im not going to be "ignoring all other cultures" anyhow, I will definetely reference the trend in other cultures in some of my secondary research, its just that my focus is on india, not because im trying to produce a pile of biased, 'exotic trash literature',or trying to portray India as rascist and discriminatory or fixated on the colour of someones skin, but because thats just the country Im most familiar with, and is the most accessible to collect research from given my time frame.
<!--QuoteBegin-elizag+May 19 2006, 07:18 PM-->QUOTE(elizag @ May 19 2006, 07:18 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->But then I remember reading something else about how the whole black=evil and white=purity view has always been around in most cultures, even in ancient Indian culture, so maybe the fair=superior perception was actually around even before the colonisation?<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
About the black=evil and white=good or purity, you are wrong. That is not true in Indian cultural context. black is the auspicious color of turiya. black=absence of any colour=absense of any quality. It often signifies the highest in many hindu sects.
However desire for a fair bride may not be related to this and I'm certain that ancient concepts of hinduism has little to do with what we feel about skin colour now.
But I was just wondering if preference for fair skin was more old than colonialism or has a psychological reason given the predominant skin colour of Indians...I cannot answer.
05-26-2006, 02:14 PM (This post was last modified: 05-26-2006, 02:18 PM by Husky.)
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->goddesses and stuff were dark? And if you look at the really ancient myths etc. this perception isn't really evident at all. But then I remember reading something else about how the whole black=evil and white=purity view has always been around in most cultures<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->Goddesses and Gods come in all colours, at least they do in Hinduism (and possibly in many other pre-Christian religions)
What's more is that the same Goddesses and Gods come in different shades. Predictably, Christian schools in India teach their trusting charges that Hinduism has white Gods (Devas) and black demons (Asuras). Of course they tie this back into their pet Aryan Invasion Theory. In two ways this is wrong:
(1) Our Gods come in all colours: literal black and white (neither of which are the colours of any real human), blue (neelam) or shyam (blackish blue - names of MahaVishnu, Krishna and Rama and Shyama for Devi), green, pink and gold for different incarnations of the Godesses, purple/violet for the usual state of Shiva (but in other forms he can be other colours).
(2) Asuras are among the good Deities of the ancient Iranians, Devas are among the good Deities of the Indians. Asuras and Devas were meant to be the same colours, which span the whole spectrum as is common with the rest of the Hindu Gods. Even when Christian schools wrongly teach that Devas were white and Asuras are black, they show their ignorance in this field (as they do regularly in others): Iranians are whiter than Indians in general. Then why are they imagined as having worshipped exclusively black Gods? (In all likeliness, the Iranians didn't, based on the Hindu version of Asuras, the Iranians would have worshipped Gods of all colours and colourlessness like us - which included black.).
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Goddesses and Gods come in all colours, at least they do in Hinduism (and possibly in many other pre-Christian religions)
Sorry havent followed this thread too much but I wouldnt read or try to read too much into peoples preference for white wimmens. Its much the same like other attributes. I like fair wimmens. I like long hair. So what does it mean ? Nothing except that I like fair wimmens and long hair.
Isn't wimmin a feminist spelling for women because they don't want the word men in women.
<!--QuoteBegin-rajesh_g+May 26 2006, 08:16 PM-->QUOTE(rajesh_g @ May 26 2006, 08:16 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->Sorry havent followed this thread too much but I wouldnt read or try to read too much into peoples preference for white wimmens. Its much the same like other attributes. I like fair wimmens. I like long hair. So what does it mean ? Nothing except that I like fair wimmens and long hair.
I dont know boss. You will have to ask a feminist.. <!--emo&--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif' /><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Isn't wimmin a feminist spelling for women because they don't want the word men in women.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
No way. <!--emo&--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif' /><!--endemo-->
as far as whiteness goes, one principle that has been around long before people had ideas of a "white" (really if you think about, its more a pinkish one) race, is that as far as males and females go, Females tend to like darker males (whether they are very black or brown or tanned) because they see it as masculine, and males generally tend to prefer lighterskinned females, although that doesnt mean they need to look like a ghost.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--> <b>Indians are no less racial </b>
Pioneer.com
A Surya PrakashÂ
British citizens have lost no time in exorcising the racist ghost that had suddenly come to haunt them after Jade Goody's inappropriate comments and conduct in the reality television show, Celebrity Big Brother. Whatever be the views of persons like Goody, the desire of British society at large to distance itself from her remarks that were construed racist and offensive is indeed commendable.
While Indians are rejoicing over Shilpa Shetty's victory (triumph of good over Goody?), the celebrations would be meaningless if they were not accompanied by some soul-searching about racist attitudes within our own country. It is all very well to raise our voices against Jade Goody but, like the British, are we ready to face the issue squarely? The people of India belong to many races and cultures. Are we even aware of the prejudices we display and the cruelty we practice towards fellow citizens who happen to be dark skinned? Are we ready, like the British, to face the truth and initiate some corrective action?
If we are troubled by racism, we must begin the clean-up act with Hindi cinema which is full of situations and dialogues that can be described as racist. Millions of Indians have watched a lungi-clad Mehmood, his face daubed in black paint, prance around crazily to "Hum Kale Hai To Kya Hua, Dilwale Hai". This indeed is the racial stereotype that Hindi cinema has projected for decades. More recently, Satish Kaushik played the role of a south Indian musician in a movie along side Govinda. Here too the make-up guys painted his face black. The dialogues in this movie, too, were loaded with crude racist remarks with Govinda and Khader Khan, another actor, heaping scorn on Satish Kaushik for being dark skinned.
I am appalled at the stereotypes that Hindi cinema and television seek to project all the time. <b>Going by these stereotypes, all south Indians are "black" and "ugly" and all north Indians are "white" and "good-looking". The truth is that most Indians have a dark or light brown skin tone</b>. This is the typical skin tone across a majority of the States in all regions be it Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan, Gujarat, Maharastra, West Bengal, Bihar, Uttar Pradesh, Karnataka or Andhra Pradesh. The tone gets lighter up north in Punjab, Jammu & Kashmir, Himachal Pradesh and Uttarakhand and darker in Tamil Nadu and Kerala. In fact, a good percentage of people in eastern Uttar Pradesh and Bihar are dark-skinned. It is, therefore, ironical and comical to find people from these States refer to the skin tone of south Indians in a pejorative way.
But the stereotypes run so deep that people from the north find it difficult to accept the fact that Indian women who have bagged the Miss World or Miss Universe titles like Aishwarya Rai and Sushmita Sen do not come from "white" northern stock. Though the Rais are from Karnataka, many in the north would like to believe that Aishwarya is a Bhumihar from Uttar Pradesh!
Hindi television has carried this trend forward. The Great Indian Comedy Show often jokes about dark-skinned people. This prejudice against dark-skinned people then gets extended to other things which constitute the ingredients of culture. You <b>first laugh at "Madrasis" because they are dark and then make a joke of other things associated with these "dark" people - their language, their dress and their food habits. Once the "Madrasis" becomes the butt end of your jokes, you begin talking down to them. </b>
This is what racism is all about and for centuries the Caucasians believed that while everything about them was perfect, the black, brown and yellow races were imperfect. This attitude led to colonisation and apartheid. It was only in the latter part of the 20th century that the White Man recognised the need to stamp out racism and other such prejudices and to bring in political correctness in public discourse.
When will this process begin here? Such is the power of these prejudices that it impacts the work of even established film stars like Shahrukh Khan, who is now anchoring Kaun Banega Crorepati. I was distressed to find Shahrukh Khan joke about the name of a contestant from Andhra Pradesh - Mr Ramakrishna Guggila - and his companion, Mr Venkateshwarlu Putta. Shahrukh joked about their names and hinted time and again that their names were unpronounceable. Then, without so much as a by your leave, Shahrukh told Mr Guggila that he would call him "Guggi" or just "Guggs". As for the contestant's companion, Shahrukh was unaware that Venkateshwarlu was one word. He kept calling him Venkatesh Warlu and eventually, unilaterally decided to rechristen him as "Venky". But the anchor's patronising attitude truly came out when he mockingly offered a prize to viewers who could say "Venkatesh Warlu Putta" five times without faltering.
Shahrukh Khan must learn political correctness quickly. It is foolish to rouse the "atmagouravam" of the Telugu-speaking people. In case Shahrukh does not know, an Andhra with an equally "unpronounceable" name - Potti Sriramulu - set Andhra on fire with his fast unto death to secure a separate Telugu State. Another Andhra with an even more "unpronounceable" name - Nandamuri Taraka Rama Rao - launched the Telugu Desam and ousted the Congress from power in that State in 1983. This he did after Rajiv Gandhi, like Shahrukh Khan, behaved inappropriately with a fellow Andhra - Mr Anjiah - who was then the Chief Minister of the State.
Shahrukh Khan's graceless conduct is in utter contrast to the great dignity and poise with which Mr Amitabh Bachchan anchored this programme earlier. I regard Mr Bachchan as the most evolved human being because life and professional experiences have purged his mind of prejudices and endowed him with sage-like qualities. That is why he made every contestant before him feel like a king. Delhi-bred "King Khan" must shake-off his prejudices if he is to emulate the real King of Indian Cinema.
Finally, a word about matrimonial ads. Every groom wants a "fair" bride and, therefore, products which promise to lighten the colour of the skin are much in demand across India and bear names which seek to reinforce the view that only those who are "fair" are "lovely". So, let us cut out this hypocrisy vis-Ã -vis Jade Goody's conduct by initiating measures that will make us a humane and tolerant society. We can make a beginning by stamping out stereotypes in Hindi cinema and television.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Every groom wants a "fair" bride <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--emo&:roll--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/ROTFL.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='ROTFL.gif' /><!--endemo--> this is true, check the matrimonial ad's even the darkest people try to pass themselves off as "wheatish".
lol if everyone wanted a fair bride then I wonder how many of them will even get married.
02-13-2007, 05:50 AM (This post was last modified: 02-13-2007, 02:36 PM by Husky.)
Article posted in Post 77:
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->The people of India belong to many races and cultures.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->Utter rubbish. And this guy is allowed to write for a newspaper? I am most surprised that it's the Pioneer, of all things.
Bharatvarsh,
In my experience the most beautiful people I've seen was this family living in a hut at the end of my Chennai grandmother's street. We see them everytime we walk to the store where we get our lightbulbs, tap washers, Tortoise mosquito repellants. They reside near it.
They are very dark, like many of us Tamils are in general. The man of the household, in his mid 30s maybe. He has such a beautiful face showing great patience, humility and responsibility towards family. I think he looks like Shiva (of whom he has several pictures hanging inside and outside his hut) and I am not the only one in my family to think so. We've seen him taking care of his aged parents in the same small hut, though he has himself very little. His wife is spectacularly beautiful as well and his children are like their parents and promise to grow into the kind of wonderful Hindu adults their parents are. There is a beauty in Indians that is unmatched in the world except in those places where people still remember who they are and what their duties are to fellow creatures.
And when my aunt and uncle took us to visit a Temple in a hilly part of Madurai, there was a place where one could wash one's hands and feet outside the entrance. A little girl, of 7 or 8 I think, she was helping her lovely mother collect water in their buckets from the same. She was beautiful like Lakshmi - flowers in hair, anklets, bracelets, earrings, necklace, pavadai and top - and when she looked at my sister and me, we couldn't help smiling though we were stunned. She smiled back, and if it were possible, she looked even more beautiful. She waved when we did, and kept smiling and turning to look at us. She too was very dark.
My sister brings up the occasion now and then and likes to remind me of the Lakshmi we met, though I need no reminding.
Then there was the little boy selling flowers for women to put in their hair (that all Hindu women wear everyday), he works on the corner of the main road. My sister actually refers to him as Krishna because he has a playful look and amazingly disarming smile. Beautiful like the rest. And also happens to be very dark.
I have yet to see people outside India who match them in beauty, theirs is of a higher level. I am waiting.
There is nothing in Indian television, north or south Indian, that showcases actors who can even come close to the same calibre. I'm not even talking about frightful looking people like Catrina Kaif or whatever.
03-10-2007, 11:15 AM (This post was last modified: 03-10-2007, 01:26 PM by Husky.)
Indirectly related.
The following is about Australia, but I first heard about this trend as happening amongst American high schoolers on a documentary: they wanted to look like the poster-girl Baptist Jessica Simpson and her twin/sister(?) http://au.news.yahoo.com/070309/2/12owg.html
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Saturday March 10, 02:35 PM
<b>Teens turn to cosmetic surgery</b>
A growing number of teenage girls are starting university with bigger breasts, smaller bottoms and straighter noses.
Doctors say Australian teenagers, mostly girls, want cosmetic surgery to boost their self-esteem, a phenomenon health professionals say is driven by the pressure to look perfect, Fairfax newspapers report.
Liposuction or breast surgery, between high school and university, are the trend.
Child psychologist Michael Carr-Gregg counsels teenagers whose parents will not let them surgically alter their bodies.
"What I'm seeing is this absolute cult of celebrity," he says. "I've got girls who want to look like Britney (Spears) - or Christina Aguilera or the Veronicas and I find this so incredibly sad."
At least two Melbourne plastic surgeons refer teenagers to Dr Carr-Gregg for counselling.
Dr Carr-Gregg is surprised by the interest for surgery. "I've never received so many letters asking me about body and surgery," he says.
Darryl Hodgkinson, a cosmetic surgeon for 26 years, says between three and five per cent of his patients are teenagers.
Victorian Health Services Commissioner Beth Wilson says such a body shape is "in the normal range for humanity, but not within the normal range of the propaganda".
"Young girls are bombarded by huge amounts of propaganda from the beauty industry. It's everywhere: billboards, <b>television, magazines</b>," she says.
"Airbrushed images which are not accurate representations of what people look like ... and it's very difficult for young girls in particular to withstand that kind of bombardment."<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->This is very sad, not to mention detrimental for teens.
But it should become part of whiteness studies. Why do American youngsters, and now many in Australia too, want to undergo painful and dangerous cosmetic <i>surgery</i> to change their appearance?
In reality, the answer is simple: it's what people in these countries today (in this case, girls) are bombarded with. And teens are particularly impressionable. Some think they too need to look a certain way to be a success/feel pretty and think they are a failure otherwise. That's why they see this surgery option as a way of changing themselves to finally have the outside of the other 'succes packages' they've seen on tv.
It's a trend. It will fade away.
A lot of it is from American television streamed to the rest of the world, though. These kids want to look like American stars in general. See also post 81 below
In Korea and Japan many actors regularly have operations to change their face structure and get larger eyes, more westernised nose (whatever that is supposed to be) and wider jaws. (But it's known Taiwanese actors don't do this.)
Don't know why they do it at all, because Koreans and Japanese look beautiful without it. One day they'll realise it's not necessary and they look better as they naturally are.
In India, the whole 'wanting to look fairer than one is' is going to go the way of the dodo too.
Of course, it's quite likely that in a few generations people will find some other fetish to grab on to. (Called fashion I guess.)
And of course there will always be the usual percentage of sane people who realise that their looks are ideally suited to them and becoming fairer or getting curly hair or pointy ears or whatever won't go well with the rest of their looks. One is (generally) born with the combination that suits one best. Personally, I've yet to see otherwise.
--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif' /><!--endemo--> )
--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif' /><!--endemo-->