L'Oreal Found Guilty of Racism.

[Wolfman]

Originally Posted by AlphaGamUGAAlum

I'm with you both that the racism and colonial attitudes of the traditional European French cause the majority of the problem.

But don't you think the religion of the minority group also contributes to some self-ghettoizing behavior? Some of the tension that may have its roots in economic issues seems to manifest itself as a rejection of the secularism and unifying culture of the French state, which then compounds the problem.

ETA: I don't mean in the L'Oreal case. That's pretty straight up discrimination based on race and ethnicity, and the descriptions from the people who had to hire for the campaign make it pretty open and shut.

I wonder, though, when you do actually have a particular product generally aimed at one ethnicity, like say products designed especially for African American hair, like the Cream of Nature line for example, would it be racist to reject white models? L'Oreal wasn't dealing specifically with a line for the pigment challenged, so there's no way it applies in that case, but it's kind of interesting to think about.

That may be so but that's the long term cost of colonialist policies that have a very definite cultural construct to French identity and citizenship and you want to siphon off the resources of the colony and then not not want to deal with the economic (and cultural) ramifications regarding the emigration of peoples from the colonies.

In terms of marketing in a so-called segmented market like the African American one in the cosmetic and hair care industry,the types of phenotypes one is dealing with run from very dark skin to very fair skin. If you've ever seen the models for the Ebony Fashion Show, they always have a diversity of models that represent the diversity of shades and features (European to African) in the community.African Americans arfe a mixed people, but the issue here is the cultural (ie, racial) component that non-white models represent in the society. This has to do with French identity as being "white." Look, Mr. Sarkozy is not French by nationality but he is white. And how ironic it is that the child of "foreigners" is one who trumpets the conservative French views and becomes the leader of the nation struggling with this issue.

[UGAalum94]

Originally Posted by Wolfman

That may be so but that's the long term cost of colonialist policies that have a very definite cultural construct to French identity and citizenship and you want to siphon off the resources of the colony and then not not want to deal with the economic (and cultural) ramifications regarding the emigration of peoples from the colonies.

Actually, what I think is so interesting is the French hope that essential French identity (the cultural construct, as you put it) was so powerful that it could be wholly transfered to former Colonial subjects.

When you contrast the French Post-Colonial attitude with any other former colonial power, France seemed to make a much stronger effort at being race neutral and egalitarian in terms of full citizenship for the citizens of former colonies.

(Can you imagine Brazilians or Angolans attempting to live in the suburbs outside of Lisbon with the expectation of financial prosperity or citizenship?)

But France seemed to think that being French was powerful enough that it would override a person's identity as a North African Muslim (or any other identity). It's kind of beautiful this faith in transcendent Frenchness, but because of the failure of their better post-colonial efforts, they confront contemporary domestic issues that other former colonial powers who just shut the door when they left never had to face.