India's obsession with lighter skin

[niishaa]

madam do you think that girls of kashmiri origin, hazara (KPK) origin & pashtun origin need these creams. I dnt think that you have met these peoples. Even their men are more ***** than your lightest model girls.

Did u even read the article.? Please do.

 

[junaid.ahmed]

Did u even read the article.? Please do.

ok than tell me what is the reason behind this attachment????

 

[niishaa]

ok than tell me what is the reason behind this attachment????

Reason. Just to show that the whole of the sub continent has this malaise, Not just one part. Don't know how you are so ****** off..

 

[Tesla]

Good Point. But my question is are there only north and south indians existing in india. Are they no other indians?? And u are saying there are no dark skinned people in north. because i have met many. And there are plently of light brown people in south also. But i agree north indians pakistanis and afghanis are the most racist. In south and oher parts of india i don't see racism on day to day basis. but when i lived in north people are so casual about it like it is not even an insult. i really feel sorry for dark skinned people in North.

Racism thrives when you have easy victims. In South India, if one dares to be racist by color, he will get is @ss kicked by 95% majority.

But color is not the only way one can be racist. South Indians call Northies dumb, while I have never heard something like that coming from North.

East, West, North, South.. we are all racists to each other in some way or the other.

 

[Tesla]

One of my friends who visited India told me his overall impression of the country, and the first thing he noticed was how everyone felt he was superior to others. It is almost as if we are trying to find an excuse to prove others inferior, and this is one big problem, for the whole of subcontinent.

 

[niishaa]

Racism thrives when you have easy victims. In South India, if one dares to be racist by color, he will get is @ss kicked by 95% majority.

But color is not the only way one can be racist. South Indians call Northies dumb, while I have never heard something like that coming from North.

East, West, North, South.. we are all racists to each other in some way or the other.

yes we are all racist. It is the degree and extent of racism i am talking about.

 

[niishaa]

One of my friends who visited India told me his overall impression of the country, and the first thing he noticed was how everyone felt he was superior to others. It is almost as if we are trying to find an excuse to prove others inferior, and this is one big problem, for the whole of subcontinent.

This +1. So true.

 

[JaDed]

One of my friends who visited India told me his overall impression of the country, and the first thing he noticed was how everyone felt he was superior to others. It is almost as if we are trying to find an excuse to prove others inferior, and this is one big problem, for the whole of subcontinent.

Good point.Most of us don't understand the difference between taking pride in ourselves and putting down others.BTW where are you from bro?

 

[CricketTragic]

Defeating racism, tribalism, intolerance and all forms of discrimination will liberate us all, victim and perpetrator alike. - Ban Ki Moon

 

[Tesla]

Good point.Most of us don't understand the difference between taking pride in ourselves and putting down others.BTW where are you from bro?

I am from Delhi brother.

 

[Thivagar]

Good Point. But my question is are there only north and south indians existing in india. Are they no other indians?? And u are saying there are no dark skinned people in north. because i have met many. And there are plently of light brown people in south also. But i agree north indians pakistanis and afghanis are the most racist. In south and oher parts of india i don't see racism on day to day basis. but when i lived in north people are so casual about it like it is not even an insult. i really feel sorry for dark skinned people in North.

This dark skinned gujarati guy used to wear fair and lovely before every match. Im serious. DEAD SERIOUS. All the Gujarati guys used to call him Khalya, basically it meant black. As usual since Guju guys are known for being weirdos and creeping out everyone it wasn't a surprise. Guju girls are alright though

 

[Yossarian]

Junaids comment is an example of what I said - Pakistanis are far more race conscious than Indians.It always comes up in their conversations.But for some reason it's India that always get the spotlight on this issue .. like they set a higher bar of civility for us.

Perhaps because Pakistani's only bring it up in conversation whilst Indians go further and try to change theirs by changing their skin tones

 

[Tesla]

Perhaps because Pakistani's only bring it up in conversation whilst Indians go further and try to change theirs by changing their skin tones

Ah, that explains most Pakistani brides ending up masking their face with 5 extra layers of powder. Not to mention Fair and lovely being the number 1 cosmetic product.

 

[Yossarian]

I saw videos of shahid afridi and fawad khan in fairness cream ads.. I really shocked ! they are already fair. what are they aiming for ? Albino Look!

Do you know anything about the psychology behind advertising, especially when it comes to beauty products? If you did, you wouldn't be making that comment.

 

[Yossarian]

Ah, that explains most Pakistani brides ending up masking their face with 5 extra layers of powder. Not to mention Fair and lovely being the number 1 cosmetic product.

So you're saying every woman (whether black, white, brown, oriental ...) who wears lipstick or uses any form of make-up is no different from Indians obsession with trying to physically and permanently change their skin tones?

It's amazing the efforts Indians are making in this thread to divert attention from what Indian writers are saying about this Indian obsession.

India’s fair skin obsession takes risky pharma turn

Sanchita Sharma, Hindustan Times, New Delhi| Updated: Apr 05, 2015 09:27 IST


The Indian obsession with fair skin has turned a little known drug meant to help cancer patients cope with chemotherapy toxicity into the latest rage. This drug is an anti-oxidant called Glutathione, and skin lightening is a side-effect of its use. Glutathione’s ominous provenance hasn’t kept it from being a runaway success in India’s whitening revolution, and it is now far more popular as a skin-whitening agent than its original use in cancer drug regimens.

Glutathione capsules come in strengths of 100 mg and 500 mg which lightens skin tone by two shades when had once a day for two to three months. Even more dangerous is the off-label use of the drug in injectable doses of 1,200 mg, usually prescribed for 10 consecutive weeks after which people are asked to switch to the capsules to retain their newfound lighter complexion.

According to the FDA, the US drug watchdog, side-effects of the injection range from skin rashes, disruption in thyroid function, kidney damage, Stevens-Johnson syndrome and toxic epidermal necrolysis. The last two life-threatening conditions cause fever, severe rash, blisters and skin peeling. Affected people have to be treated in the hyper-sterile burns wards of hospitals.

Each vial costs Rs 7,000 but Delhi techie Rita Saxena, 35, is not complaining. “I wanted to be fairer all my life and now I noticeably am two shades lighter. The treatment set me back by almost Rs 90,000 but every shot was worth it,” says the Hauz Khas resident.

Age and gender is no bar when it comes to seeking fairness at a cost ranging between Rs 10,000 to Rs 2 lakh. “Most people come to us (dermatologists) after experimenting with over-the-counter fairness products or after having scrubbed themselves pink with a loofah. Fixing the damage takes as much time as customising solutions for clients,” says dermatologist Dr Rashmi Shetty, who runs a clinic in Mumbai. Some of her clients are well into their 70s.

Almost all skin-lightening products come with risks. “Most fairness creams contain steroids that increase risks of skin infections, acne, and slow wound healing. Hydroquinone inevitably causes dark patches (hyper-pigmentation) or untreatable skin (ochronosis), which are difficult to treat,” says senior dermatologist Shehla Agarwal, who runs Mehak Skin Clinic in Delhi.

Skin-lightening is among the fastest-growing beauty segment, standing at Rs 3,000 crore in 2013. “Over the past two years, the skin-whitening sector has grown by 20-25%,” says Ajay Kumar Babel, general manager at Ethicare Remedies, a pharma company.


http://www.hindustantimes.com/wellne...1-1334026.aspx

 

[niishaa]

Do you know anything about the psychology behind advertising, especially when it comes to beauty products? If you did, you wouldn't be making that comment.

No i really don't.

 

[Yossarian]

No i really don't.

Then I would politely suggest that its possibly worth getting some basic understanding on the topic.

It's no coincidence that, even though people are better educated, this obsession with wanting to change skin tone is on the increase in the age of mass media and bombardment of consumers with advertising during every aspect of their daily lives - whether out walking/driving, watching tv, attending sporting events, out shopping, - even when using your mobile phone.

So, as I suggest, it would be worth googling the topic and reading some articles on the tactics and psychology behind it all.

 

[Saj]

This isn't just an issue in India but also in Pakistan.

Some of my relatives are into this. Also just look at some of Pakistan's cricketers who's skin seems lighter these days.

 

[No_Username]

As much as we may criticize this culture, the fact remains that if we were given the opportunity to be lighter skinned, we would all take it.

And by the way, Pakistanis/Indians aren't the only ones who do this. A lot of black people also avoid getting dark whereas a lot of white people tan themselves. It's a preference.

 

[Donal Cozzie]

I still cant believe that fair and lovely crap actually exists )

 

[Syed1]

I still cant believe that fair and lovely crap actually exists )

The same way tanning salons or tanning sprays exist..

 

[Donal Cozzie]

The same way tanning salons or tanning sprays exist..

Yup they're both ridiculously stupid

 

[Indian_Supporter]

I still cant believe that fair and lovely crap actually exists )

Indians or rather Asians use it to glow their skin. May be I know its tough for you to fathom sitting in Ireland and I can completely relate to you. But trust me most Indians are obsessed with white skin. You go to any matrimony site (yes we do have them unlike E Harmony or blind dates you guys have ) the first criteria for any guy or girl is that partner should be fair skinned.

Trust me its not only restricted to India but applies to British Indians as well. Specially the British Indian girls look down upon fellow brown skin. And not only skin colour they tend to look upon fellow asians (especially expats) in a very demeaning way. I hv been the victim myself. I have never been questioned for my skin colour from a white person but all taunts I have recieved is from British Asians. Its quite shameful but its a hard fact which very few people willing to accept.

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

 

[Donal Cozzie]

Indians or rather Asians use it to glow their skin. May be I know its tough for you to fathom sitting in Ireland and I can completely relate to you. But trust me most Indians are obsessed with white skin. You go to any matrimony site (yes we do have them unlike E Harmony or blind dates you guys have ) the first criteria for any guy or girl is that partner should be fair skinned.

Trust me its not only restricted to India but applies to British Indians as well. Specially the British Indian girls look down upon fellow brown skin. And not only skin colour they tend to look upon fellow asians (especially expats) in a very demeaning way. I hv been the victim myself. I have never been questioned for my skin colour from a white person but all taunts I have recieved is from British Asians. Its quite shameful but its a hard fact which very few people willing to accept.

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

Goodbye PP I got a flight to catch

 

[Bewal Express]

Black people and blackness is seen as inferior.

 

[sensible-indian-fan]

Skin complex is real in India.

 

[blackanhyellow]

The only time I have a problem with this obsession with white skin is when it is used to demean other people with darker colored skin. That is called racism!

However, if a person prefers lighter skinned people because that is what he is attracted to then there shouldn't be any stigma involved in this.

Do we criticize women when they prefer tall guys over short guys?

Do we criticize men when they want a girl who is slim rather than chubby/fat/obese?

Skin color is just a preference, so if a certain skin tone is what someone is attracted to then so be it.

If you are a darker skinned person then find another person who finds that skin tone attractive.

However, referring to someone derogatorily in reference to their skin tone is racist and you need to jump off a bridge with that attitude.

 

[Thivagar]

The same way tanning salons or tanning sprays exist..

Yup they're both ridiculously stupid

Both works. Fair and Lovely worked on me when I was 7-10 year old youngsta beauty. Worked more like a recovery cream from sun tan/burn. It doesn't change you natural skin colour .

 

[Thivagar]

Indians or rather Asians use it to glow their skin. May be I know its tough for you to fathom sitting in Ireland and I can completely relate to you. But trust me most Indians are obsessed with white skin. You go to any matrimony site (yes we do have them unlike E Harmony or blind dates you guys have ) the first criteria for any guy or girl is that partner should be fair skinned.

Trust me its not only restricted to India but applies to British Indians as well. Specially the British Indian girls look down upon fellow brown skin. And not only skin colour they tend to look upon fellow asians (especially expats) in a very demeaning way. I hv been the victim myself. I have never been questioned for my skin colour from a white person but all taunts I have recieved is from British Asians. Its quite shameful but its a hard fact which very few people willing to accept.

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

Tinder...................

 

[Syed1]

Tinder...................

You seem to be a big advocate of Tinder

 

[CricketCartoons]

Goodbye PP I got a flight to catch

White skin, not freckles. So I would suggest you stay where you are and keep praying for your luck.

 

[Zak_Fan]

This isn't just an issue in India but also in Pakistan.

Some of my relatives are into this. Also just look at some of Pakistan's cricketers who's skin seems lighter these days.

Look at Bollywood today. SRK looked like a typical UP/Bihari guy when he first entered the industry. Look at him now.

 

[endymion248]

Do we criticize men when they want a girl who is slim over fat/obese girls

Not comparable, being fat is a lifestyle choice and a poor one at that. Who'd want to be with a person who can't even treat their body right? Skin colour preference is arbitrary.

 

[blackanhyellow]

Not comparable, being fat is a lifestyle choice and a poor one at that. Who'd want to be with a person who can't even treat their body right? Skin colour preference is arbitrary.

I knew someone would come up with that counter argument...

So that is why I also mentioned:

"Do we criticize women when they prefer tall guys over short guys? "

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

As much as we may criticize this culture, the fact remains that if we were given the opportunity to be lighter skinned, we would all take it.

Not if we've got any sense. My cousin is married to a girl who is bleaching her skin or something. The problem is she was already pretty light skinned to start with, so now she looks like a ghost. Terrible look if you ask me, she looks ill.

 

[endymion248]

I knew someone would come up with that counter argument...

So that is why I also mentioned:

"Do we criticize women when they prefer tall guys over short guys? "

So you knew it was wrong and yet still tried to sneak it in?

 

[JaDed]

Skin complex is real in India.

Its real in Pakistan as well.

 

[Zak_Fan]

I think it is fine to desire a certain skin color as long as you don't look down upon people of other shades.

 

[blackanhyellow]

So you knew it was wrong and yet still tried to sneak it in?

My point was that everyone has their preferences when it comes to what they are attracted to.

These preferences can include both things you can change and things you have no control over.

So it was not "wrong", I just gave an example of both.

 

[endymion248]

My point was that everyone has their preferences when it comes to what they are attracted to.

These preferences can include both things you can change and things you have no control over.

So it was not "wrong", I just gave an example of both.

That we have preferences which are things we can change doesn't legitimize preferences that are things which we can't change. Even your point about height is not a perfect comparison: from an evolutionary perspective, it's natural to be attracted towards stronger and taller people, it's not completely arbitrary. Prefering dark over light or light over dark, however, is an internalization of society's prejudices.

 

[blackanhyellow]

That we have preferences which are things we can change doesn't legitimize preferences that are things which we can't change. Even your point about height is not a perfect comparison: from an evolutionary perspective, it's natural to be attracted towards stronger and taller people, it's not completely arbitrary. Prefering dark over light or light over dark, however, is an internalization of society's prejudices.

I disagree.

If you use the argument that being attracted to a certain skin tone is an internalization of society's prejudices then you have to apply that to all concepts of attractiveness.

For example, there could be a bigger girl (who is perfectly healthy and has a healthy fat percentage) and have another girl who is "skinny".

It is society that tells you that the skinny girl is more attractive than the other one, with most actresses in Hollywood, Bollywood, TV commercials being on the skinny side.

This has nothing to do with evolution, it is a societal concept of beauty.

For example 100 years ago, in certain countries people preferred slightly chubbier women. In current times those same countries may prefer skinnier women because the standards of beauty have changed in their society.

Another example would be a longer or hooked nose. In certain cultures in the past, this was seen as a feature of beauty.

While in other countries, hooked noses (especially in recent times) are considered unattractive.

I fail to see an evolutionary aspect in these examples, if you can see one feel free to point it out.

Anyways, to summarize, what you are attracted to has a lot to do with society yes, but at the end of the day it is what you are attracted to.

Whether it is light/dark skin, small nose/long nose, tall/short, blonde//brunette, larger waist/smaller waist there shouldn't be a stigma involved in having a preference of attraction.

The problem arises when people are discriminated or hated for looking a certain way which is the issue.

 

[Slog]

This reminds me of a Pakistani friend from Faisalabad (went to school in lhr) who was my year in college.

He had a black roommate and used to whine about being paired with a 'kaala' atleast once a day during the first 2 months. During one chilling session he announces with absolute shock and in all seriousness, 'Dudes. My roommate is actually proud to be black!!"

It was a revelation to him that not all dark skinned people are wallowing in self pity and aiming to somehow get lighter skin

 

[endymion248]

I disagree.

If you use the argument that being attracted to a certain skin tone is an internalization of society's prejudices then you have to apply that to all concepts of attractiveness.

For example, there could be a bigger girl (who is perfectly healthy and has a healthy fat percentage) and have another girl who is "skinny".

It is society that tells you that the skinny girl is more attractive than the other one, with most actresses in Hollywood, Bollywood, TV commercials being on the skinny side.

This has nothing to do with evolution, it is a societal concept of beauty.

For example 100 years ago, in certain countries people preferred slightly chubbier women. In current times those same countries may prefer skinnier women because the standards of beauty have changed in their society.

Another example would be a longer or hooked nose. In certain cultures in the past, this was seen as a feature of beauty.

While in other countries, hooked noses (especially in recent times) are considered unattractive.

I fail to see an evolutionary aspect in these examples, if you can see one feel free to point it out.

Anyways, to summarize, what you are attracted to has a lot to do with society yes, but at the end of the day it is what you are attracted to.

Whether it is light/dark skin, small nose/long nose, tall/short, blonde//brunette, larger waist/smaller waist there shouldn't be a stigma involved in having a preference of attraction.

The problem arises when people are discriminated or hated for looking a certain way which is the issue.

Yes, it's true that, in antiquity, an aquiline nose was considered more attractive than today and that is something that may be seen as arbitrary in the same way as skin tone. I think that someone said about Cleopatra that, had her nose been shorter, the face of the world would be different. And that is true in both situations. For example, Pakistanis tend to look down on people with ''pinha'' noses which, for racial reasons, happen to be blacks/south indians/asians. However, there is an arbitray element to it (flat vs aquiline) and an objective element to it (crooked/asymetric vs straight). It's probably closer to skin preference than to weight preference in terms of internalized beauty standard. I don't consider weight preference to be an internalized beauty standard, can you give the example of a society that objectively prefers obese over slim?

 

[Zak_Fan]

Association of skin color with social stature is something that plays a part too. Darker looking people in the subcontinent have generally been quite poor..while color white is associated with affluence and power. Same was the case with Africans. Stereotypically, a black male was known to be a slave having white masters. So there is a lot of history behind this skin based inferiority complex.

But as you see more and more black superstars and some favorable stereotypes..things are changing. Delhi university is one example where fair and beautiful North East chicks these days prefer black males over Desis or NE guys because even the most fatichar black male to them is like an Usher or Lil Wayne who parties all night.

So imo, as long as we can judge a person's social standing based on his skin color...this obsession will continue. The day we change our stereotypes, things will improve.

 

[blackanhyellow]

Yes, it's true that, in antiquity, an aquiline nose was considered more attractive than today and that is something that may be seen as arbitrary in the same way as skin tone. I think that someone said about Cleopatra that, had her nose been shorter, the face of the world would be different. And that is true in both situations. For example, Pakistanis tend to look down on people with ''pinha'' noses which, for racial reasons, happen to be blacks/south indians/asians. However, there is an arbitray element to it (flat vs aquiline) and an objective element to it (crooked/asymetric vs straight). It's probably closer to skin preference than to weight preference in terms of internalized beauty standard. I don't consider weight preference to be an internalized beauty standard, can you give the example of a society that objectively prefers obese over slim?

Renaissance Europe.

 

[endymion248]

Renaissance Europe.

Proof?

 

[blackanhyellow]

Proof?

Its a commonly held perception based on art and literature of that era.

I remember reading about it in a sociology elective I had.

When I get time I will do some research on it and maybe give you a link.

 

[endymion248]

Its a commonly held perception based on art and literature of that era.

I remember reading about it in a sociology elective I had.

When I get time I will do some research on it and maybe give you a link.

Ok then do you have art from the time where the ideal of beauty is shown as obese? Preferably from different artists rather than one guy with a fat fetish (Rubens).

 

[blackanhyellow]

Ok then do you have art from the time where the ideal of beauty is shown as obese? Preferably from different artists rather than one guy with a fat fetish (Rubens).

Heres a Raphael:





If you are interested go look up Da Vinci, Veronese, there are a whole host.

 

[Yossarian]

It is society that tells you that the skinny girl is more attractive than the other one, with most actresses in Hollywood, Bollywood, TV commercials being on the skinny side.

Not everywhere. In many parts of the world, 'plump' looking (obviously not obese) girls are considered as being better looking, and therefore more desirable, than slim ones. It was the same in Europe during the Middle Ages ( - just look at some old paintings for example).

In many parts of the world, even today, fat men are preferred by women because being fat is a sign of being wealthy (because they can afford to eat so much), and the woman who marries one will not go hungry and neither will her children.

I read somehere that the reason many men prefer women with large mammalian glands(ie big chest) and big hips (ie buttocks), as can be seen by the number of women who are going for implants in both regions to 'accentuate' those body parts, is because subconciously, the 'big hips' means less likely to be complications during childbirth, and large mammalian glands means plenty of milk production for the child. ie strong healthy offspring.

In fact, everything that is considered as being 'desirable', 'beautiful' and 'handsome' in the opposite sex has some subconcious basis as regards producing healthy children, and the ability to look after them, feed them, protect them and keep them away from danger

 

[endymion248]

Heres a Raphael:

View attachment 62835



If you are interested go look up Da Vinci, Veronese, there are a whole host.

Except she isn't an ideal of beauty, it's a religious painting. Raphael also drew old/short/blind people, it doesn't mean that people of the time were attracted to those. In the same way, mother figures such as Mary were drawn as slightly fat, that's because they were not supposed to be attractive/erotic but rather pregnantish/maternal.

Not to mention she isn't even obese.

 

[blackanhyellow]

Not everywhere. In many parts of the world, 'plump' looking (obviously not obese) girls are considered as being better looking, and therefore more desirable, than slim ones. It was the same in Europe during the Middle Ages ( - just look at some old paintings for example).

In many parts of the world, even today, fat men are preferred by women because being fat is a sign of being wealthy (because they can afford to eat so much), and the woman who marries one will not go hungry and neither will her children.

I know I made point a few posts ago. However it is still their society that tells them to find a certain body type attractive isn't it?

If these societies had more access to Hollywood culture (or even Bollywood culture) it would start shaping their perceptions into something totally different.

mammalian glands[/I](ie big chest) and big hips (ie buttocks), as can be seen by the number of women who are going for implants in both regions to 'accentuate' those body parts, is because subconciously, the 'big hips' means less likely to be complications during childbirth, and large mammalian glands means plenty of milk production for the child. ie strong healthy offspring.

In fact, everything that is considered as being 'desirable', 'beautiful' and 'handsome' in the opposite sex has some subconcious basis as regards producing healthy children, and the ability to look after them, feed them, protect them and keep them away from danger

You are right there are certain evolutionary aspects like Endy pointed out a few posts ago.

However I made the argument for hooked/long noses. These were considered features of beauty in certain cultures of the past. It was a sign of nobility even.

In current times they are viewed as unattractive in most places.

A crooked nose or a small nose has no evolutionary significance, it is largely based on the standards of beauty set by a society.

 

[blackanhyellow]

Except she isn't an ideal of beauty, it's a religious painting. Raphael also drew old/short/blind people, it doesn't mean that people of the time were attracted to those. In the same way, mother figures such as Mary were drawn as slightly fat, that's because they were not supposed to be attractive/erotic but rather pregnantish/maternal.

Not to mention she isn't even obese.

Its funny you mention that.

The thing is in the middle ages, a woman who had maternal instincts and wanted to have many children was seen as attractive.

In those days if a Taylor Swift type woman that is career oriented would not have been considered an ideal woman.

So in effect (at least in my opinion), those "maternal" paintings could have a lot to do with what that society considered attractive.

Also, she is what people would consider "fat" if not obese these days. Recall, I said even if a woman has a healthy body fat percentage but is naturally bigger she is rejected in society in favor of a skinny model type body.

Obviously this is not always the case as different people have different tastes, but I am talking about on the whole.

 

[endymion248]

Its funny you mention that.

The thing is in the middle ages, a woman who had maternal instincts and wanted to have many children was seen as attractive.

In those days if a Taylor Swift type woman that is career oriented would not have been considered an ideal woman.

So in effect (at least in my opinion), those "maternal" paintings could have a lot to do with what that society considered attractive.

Also, she is what people would consider "fat" if not obese these days. Recall, I said even if a woman has a healthy body fat percentage but is naturally bigger she is rejected in society in favor of a skinny model type body.

Obviously this is not always the case as different people have different tastes, but I am talking about on the whole.

But right next to that you had erotic paintings where the women were thin so we know that this is what they found attractive. When a medieval man went out to choose his bride, he wasn't like ''This woman looks like the Virgin Mary so I desire her''. Look up the venus of milo which is one of the most universal representations of female beauty.

How would a woman be a ''bigger woman'' with a healthy body fat percentage? Do you mean muscular women? In which case muscular people are not necessarily bigger than non-muscular people and always smaller than fat people as muscles have a lower tissue density than fat (except when trained specifically for hypertrophy using drugs).

 

[Yossarian]

However I made the argument for hooked/long noses. These were considered features of beauty in certain cultures of the past. It was a sign of nobility even.

In current times they are viewed as unattractive in most places.

A crooked nose or a small nose has no evolutionary significance, it is largely based on the standards of beauty set by a society.

Even the size, type and shapes of noses is related to environmental conditions and evolution.

It is only because of human migrations, inter-racial/inter-ethnic marriages over the last few hundred years, that we see such diversity in shapes and types of noses, chins, hair, skin colour and virtually every other body feature.

In closed and isolated societies that have had very little interactions with the outside world, such as remote tribes in Africa and the Amazon region, there is hardly any diversity and much more uniformity - and it's all because of the local environmental conditions, food sources etc, and the best physical features required to survive, produce and raise children in terms of evolution.

 

[endymion248]

Even the size, type and shapes of noses is related to environmental conditions and evolution.

It is only because of human migrations, inter-racial/inter-ethnic marriages over the last few hundred years, that we see such diversity in shapes and types of noses, chins, hair, skin colour and virtually every other body feature.

In closed and isolated societies that have had very little interactions with the outside world, such as remote tribes in Africa and the Amazon region, there is hardly any diversity and much more uniformity - and it's all because of the local environmental conditions, food sources etc, and the best physical features required to survive, produce and raise children in terms of evolution.

The concept of human races is not a scientific ones. The differenciation between human races is a recent one, less than 100k years ago so we don't find the same diversity among humans than among other animals. Arguably, humans are just a single race. There is more diversity among humans of a single ''race'' than there is diversity between the average of one race compared to the average of other races.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1893020/

Not only that but, in the previous 100k years, humans have seen some massive migrations and inter-mixing, maybe even more so than recent ones.

 

[Yossarian]

The concept of human races is not a scientific ones. The differenciation between human races is a recent one, less than 100k years ago so we don't find the same diversity among humans than among other animals. Arguably, humans are just a single race. There is more diversity among humans of a single ''race'' than there is diversity between the average of one race compared to the average of other races.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1893020/

Not only that but, in the previous 100k years, humans have seen some massive migrations and inter-mixing, maybe even more so than recent ones.

Call it whatever you wish. But there is a reason why, even nowadays by and large, one can look at an individual and make a pretty good guess as to which part of the world they originated from. Meaning that, historically, people of that region of the world acquired those physical features, via evolution, because they were the best attributes required to survive, produce and raise children in the local environmental conditions, and the availability and type of local food resources.

 

[blackanhyellow]

Even the size, type and shapes of noses is related to environmental conditions and evolution.

It is only because of human migrations, inter-racial/inter-ethnic marriages over the last few hundred years, that we see such diversity in shapes and types of noses, chins, hair, skin colour and virtually every other body feature.

In closed and isolated societies that have had very little interactions with the outside world, such as remote tribes in Africa and the Amazon region, there is hardly any diversity and much more uniformity - and it's all because of the local environmental conditions, food sources etc, and the best physical features required to survive, produce and raise children in terms of evolution.

That does not explain why in the past a society dominated with normal noses, a hooked nose would be seen as attractive.

What aspect of evolution influenced today's ideal standard of a small nose?

Does a nose like Jennifer Lawrence offer some sort of evolutionary advantage over the nose of someone like Adrian Brody?

 

[endymion248]

Call it whatever you wish. But there is a reason why, even nowadays by and large, one can look at an individual and make a pretty good guess as to which part of the world they originated from. Meaning that, historically, people of that region of the world acquired those physical features, via evolution, because they were the best attributes required to survive, produce and raise children in the local environmental conditions, and the availability and type of local food resources.

Not really. You can't look at a person and accurately guess where their ancestors lived 2-3k years ago. The only populations for whom this works are africans and that is infact because they had the least migration towards rather than from. Evolution seldom works over small timeframes so migration is more important than environment.

 

[Saj]

Incidentally several of the Pakistani cricketers are into this.

You only have to look at pictures of them a few years ago compared to now.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Its funny you mention that.

The thing is in the middle ages, a woman who had maternal instincts and wanted to have many children was seen as attractive.

In those days if a Taylor Swift type woman that is career oriented would not have been considered an ideal woman.

So in effect (at least in my opinion), those "maternal" paintings could have a lot to do with what that society considered attractive.

Also, she is what people would consider "fat" if not obese these days. Recall, I said even if a woman has a healthy body fat percentage but is naturally bigger she is rejected in society in favor of a skinny model type body.

Obviously this is not always the case as different people have different tastes, but I am talking about on the whole.

Which is fair enough, but in reality the only society we are really bothered about is the one we currently live in. Maybe plump women or fat men were considered attractive in the days where people were starving, but outside of the third world these days it's just seen as lack of self control and fitness.

Skin colour on the other hand is not much of an issue in the developed countries other than among those who are probably insecure for other reasons or have some sort of fetish. I know in Pakistan we like to lionise singers for their abilities above all else which is admirable, but Nusrat Fateh Ali Khan might have been a light skinned classical legend, but he still looked like a beached walrus.

 

[Yossarian]

That does not explain why in the past a society dominated with normal noses, a hooked nose would be seen as attractive.

What aspect of evolution influenced today's ideal standard of a small nose?

Does a nose like Jennifer Lawrence offer some sort of evolutionary advantage over the nose of someone like Adrian Brody?

Don't confuse modern societies, which are a mixture of historical ethnicities, inter-racial / inter-ethnic marriages over the last few hundred years, plus the likes of Hollywood and Bollywood telling us what is heroic (and hence handsome and beautiful) and what is villainous (ie ugly) versus societies less prone to the above factors.

An (American) dentist friend once told me (I don't know if this is correct or not) that societies like those of the USA, which is a melting pot of all ethnicities and races, tend to have more tooth problems (those not related to hygene and keeping the teeth clean). By that he meant, for example, crooked teeth due to, say, the teeth being inherited from the side of the family with generally large teeth, whilst the jaw being inherited from the side of the family with generally small faces/ jaws. He claimed he came to this conclusion after working in the Middle East, and comparing the teeth of Indians/ Pakistanis/ local Saudi's with those of Americans, especially those Americans who had mixed heritage.

As I said, I dont know if there is any truth in this, I'm just repeating what was told to me by a dentist friend.

 

[blackanhyellow]

Which is fair enough, but in reality the only society we are really bothered about is the one we currently live in. Maybe plump women or fat men were considered attractive in the days where people were starving, but outside of the third world these days it's just seen as lack of self control and fitness.

Skin colour on the other hand is not much of an issue in the developed countries other than among those who are probably insecure for other reasons or have some sort of fetish. I know in Pakistan we like to lionise singers for their abilities above all else which is admirable, but Nusrat Fateh Ali Khan might have been a light skinned classical legend, but he still looked like a beached walrus.

The argument was about if finding dark skin as attractive or unattractive should be stigmatized (not talking about in a racial context, merely what people are physically attracted to).

I merely mentioned examples of societies in the past which differed in their views of beauty compared to modern standards.

I was using those as an example to counter Endy's arguments.

Obviously no one today cares about what people found attractive 400 years ago.

 

[Yossarian]

Not really. You can't look at a person and accurately guess where their ancestors lived 2-3k years ago. The only populations for whom this works are africans and that is infact because they had the least migration towards rather than from. Evolution seldom works over small timeframes so migration is more important than environment.

C'mon. I'm not talking about 2-3K years ago.

You're telling me that you cant look at a person and make a very good guess that they are originally from China or India versus, say, from Sweden or Norway? Or even, say, from Pakistan as opposed to from Bangladesh? You're deliberately missing the gist of the point being made in the post you've quoted.

 

[blackanhyellow]

Don't confuse modern societies, which are a mixture of historical ethnicities, inter-racial / inter-ethnic marriages over the last few hundred years, plus the likes of Hollywood and Bollywood telling us what is heroic (and hence handsome and beautiful) and what is villainous (ie ugly) versus societies less prone to the above factors.

There was also status influence. Nobles, aristocrats, conquerors were often seen as the ruling class and the societal standards of beauty were shaped around them.

There were always peasants and poor people and certain features among these people was seen by society as unattractive.

Also they have had paintings, drawings, live theater for a very long time. These things often shaped perception.

They did not have the current media power, but did have a relatively thriving media scene in most societies in the past.

 

[Donal Cozzie]

White skin, not freckles. So I would suggest you stay where you are and keep praying for your luck.

Well I wasnt planning on courting you anyway CC

 

[Rishikesh]

I still cant believe that fair and lovely crap actually exists )

A company few years before launched an intimate wash for whitening ....................... lol

 

[Saeed]

Color doesn't matter, anyone can look decent as long as they take care of themselves. So stop taking shower in Ganges river and stop with those stupid old fashioned Salman Khan type haircuts.

 

[pillionrider]

I know in Pakistan we like to lionise singers for their abilities above all else which is admirable.

And you claim this based on.... your extensive first-hand experience living in Pakistan )

If you post what you do for fun's sake or to troll your 'ethnic' neighbours, that's fine. But I sincerely hope you don't believe the drivel you post. Actually, come to think of it, why should I 'hope' or 'care.' Keep posting and entertaining us.

 

[greenfan]

in media i dont see this kind of racism in india. i bet in pakistan people use more fair and lovely than in india.

 

[endymion248]

C'mon. I'm not talking about 2-3K years ago.

You're telling me that you cant look at a person and make a very good guess that they are originally from China or India versus, say, from Sweden or Norway? Or even, say, from Pakistan as opposed to from Bangladesh? You're deliberately missing the gist of the point being made in the post you've quoted.

You said that environment shapes races. How can it be environment if you can't tell where someone has been living for the past 2-3k years?

 

[Yossarian]

You said that environment shapes races. How can it be environment if you can't tell where someone has been living for the past 2-3k years?

In that case explain if not for evolution due to local environment, and the availability and type of local food sources, over thousands of years, why , for example, most Chinese are distinguishable from most Indians, and both are distinguishable from the vast majority of Scandinavians?

Of course the differences become less pronounced between regions in close proximity to each other (ie due to the local environmental conditions and local food sources being not so different, leading to similar traits / evolution, along with an element of inter-mixing due to their proximity to each other)

 

[Yossarian]

in media i dont see this kind of racism in india. i bet in pakistan people use more fair and lovely than in india.

Doubt it. Incidentally, I wonder if there are any statistics showing the sales of skin whitening products in different parts of India, say between those in the south, versus the north, versus Bengal and the east, versus north-west (especially punjab) of India ?

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

And you claim this based on.... your extensive first-hand experience living in Pakistan )

If you post what you do for fun's sake or to troll your 'ethnic' neighbours, that's fine. But I sincerely hope you don't believe the drivel you post. Actually, come to think of it, why should I 'hope' or 'care.' Keep posting and entertaining us.

I'm not really sure how me commenting on Pakistani singers is trolling Indians but if you felt deep pain from the post then let me assure you that it wasn't intended.

 

[pillionrider]

I'm not really sure how me commenting on Pakistani singers is trolling Indians but if you felt deep pain from the post then let me assure you that it wasn't intended.

Ack.

My sentence should have read, "If you generally post what you do for fun's sake or to troll your 'ethnic' neighbours, that's fine."

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Ack.

My sentence should have read, "If you generally post what you do for fun's sake or to troll your 'ethnic' neighbours, that's fine."

It still doesn't make any sense. I am genuinely baffled what it was in that post about Pakistani singers that made you think I was trolling about India.

 

[endymion248]

In that case explain if not for evolution due to local environment, and the availability and type of local food sources, over thousands of years, why , for example, most Chinese are distinguishable from most Indians, and both are distinguishable from the vast majority of Scandinavians?

Of course the differences become less pronounced between regions in close proximity to each other (ie due to the local environmental conditions and local food sources being not so different, leading to similar traits / evolution, along with an element of inter-mixing due to their proximity to each other)

Because they are descended from different populations, which is why all native americans across three continents (NA, SA and Asia) look more similar to eachother than any one of them does to Europeans, despite the fact that, say, the surroudings of the Saint-Laurent are more similar to Europe than to Nicaragua.

 

[Yossarian]

Because they are descended from different populations, which is why all native americans across three continents (NA, SA and Asia) look more similar to eachother than any one of them does to Europeans, despite the fact that, say, the surroudings of the Saint-Laurent are more similar to Europe than to Nicaragua.

And if not for evolution due to environmental and food resources factors, how do you explain physical characteristic differences between and within ethnic groups, differences that are significant enough such that tribes and clans within the same general ethnic groups are often distinguishable from one another?

Unless of course you're suggesting that there is no such this as 'evolution'? Whilst if you do agree with the concept of evolution, what are the factors involved if not the local environment, and local availability and type of food resources?

 

[endymion248]

And if not for evolution due to environmental and food resources factors, how do you explain physical characteristic differences between and within ethnic groups, differences that are significant enough such that tribes and clans within the same general ethnic groups are often distinguishable from one another?

Unless of course you're suggesting that there is no such this as 'evolution'? Whilst if you do agree with the concept of evolution, what are the factors involved if not the local environment, and local availability and type of food resources?

You can't have evolution without selection pressure and it has been a while that environmental selection pressure has not been a significant contributor to human evolution. The differences between races are mostly due to migration and inter-mixing, sometimes with different humanoids. A good way to visualize that is that Finns and Estonians are not blond or blue eyed: they still have dark hair and dark eyes. The main thing that environment has an effect on is skin colour.

 

[Yossarian]

You can't have evolution without selection pressure and it has been a while that environmental selection pressure has not been a significant contributor to human evolution. The differences between races are mostly due to migration and inter-mixing, sometimes with different humanoids. A good way to visualize that is that Finns and Estonians are not blond or blue eyed: they still have dark hair and dark eyes. The main thing that environment has an effect on is skin colour.

Good that you've at least conceded the point in relation to the environment, albeit only in regards to skin colour. Now read this in regards to height and how some populations have become taller just in the last few hundred years, due to better diet (ie availability and type of food resources).

Q: Why are people taller today than yesterday?

A: There are two main reasons. One is that the diet has improved considerably. In spite of some very negative aspects of the diet of industrialized populations, we have much better vitamin, mineral and protein intake than 100 or 200 years ago. As a consequence the body can grow much better.

In addition, our health has improved considerably along with medical technology. We have fewer endemic diseases, and fewer epidemic diseases. That is important because an incidence of disease usually means that the nutrients we do consume are not absorbed by the body sufficiently. Diseases lay a claim on our energy intake, so that there is not enough left over for the body to grow. These two factors play a considerable role.

We have been increasing in height for about 140 years. Prior to that, there were cycles in height, depending on economic circumstances and agricultural productivity and so forth. We were relatively tall in the Middle Ages, when population densities were relatively low and food supplies were still fairly adequate. The low point was in the 17th century. Frenchmen, for example, were about 162 cm on average [not quite 5 ft. 4 in.], which is extremely small. Only since about the middle of the 19th century has there been a general trend upwards.

http://content.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1820836,00.html

So that's two of the most visible physical features, skin colour and height, taken care of, ie both being affected by the environment and/or type/availability of food resources. In the case of height, taking less a couple of hundred years for the differences to show.

Now you can extrapolate that and it's not difficult to see how, over longer periods, other physical feature can also be affected by the local environment and local food resources.