Friday, October 2, 2009

Lashing out against inadequate lashes

Of course, advertisements on beauty are inescapable, and for the most part, I've grown rather numb to the inundating barrage of critiques on my appearance by the media.

But I've watched this Latisse commercial a few times now, and what disturbs me more than anything is that phrase, "for inadequate or not enough lashes." Here it is:



I want to know who determined that someone's eyelashes are "inadequate" or "not enough." What length or thickness qualifies as "adequate"? When is my facial hair "enough" but not excessive?

What further intrigues me about this commercial is that the product is FDA approved for the treatment of hypotrichosis. This is an actual medical term used to describe lack of hair growth.

I think there's a fine line between growing hair where there is none and using beauty products to create fuller lashes. The television commercial for Latisse seems incredibly misleading on this point. Is it a product to create lashes where none have grown, or is this a cosmetic product with similar effects to that of mascara? The ad is disturbingly unclear.

What is clear is that we, as a culture, are obsessed with proper hair growth. It has to grow in the right places at the right rate and with the right thickness. Any variation is aberrant. This is certainly an issue for both genders -- men struggle to conceal and reverse baldness, while women wax those unsightly hairs. Both genders shave.

I can't claim to be exempt from these practices myself. I care about how my hair (all of it) appears. I spend time every day making sure that my facial hair meets my culture's beauty standards.

But I worry when these beauty standards become defined as medical deficiencies that need to be "cured." The plastic surgery industry began this trend, asking women to fix everything from their noses to their lady parts. (Yes, I said "lady parts." Perhaps unbelievably, designer vaginas are the new trend.)

Products and practices like these continue to blur the line between aesthetic appearance and medical treatment. It's unsettling at best. At worst, it's dangerous, painful, and just another method for "fixing" women's inadequate bodies.

1 comments:

Unknown said...

What kills me about this commercial is that the advertisers felt the need to explain that "inadequate" means "not enough".
Do they really think that consumers would be confused if they just left it at "inadequate"?