THE FINE LINE BETWEEN GHASTLY AND GLAMOROUS
Nars’ Orgasm blush was just a bit of fun, but Tom Ford’s lipstick line is edging on unsavoury.
Tom Ford at the 2021 CFDA awards in New York. Photograph: Caitlin Ochs/Reuters
Notorious for antagonising feminists with his provocative advertising campaigns, American fashion designer Tom Ford strikes again with a collection of lipsticks whose shade names are sure to leave a sour taste in the mouth. The brand’s beauty team have created products called Age of Consent and First Time, the latest in problematic names used to describe something used by millions of women every day.
The lipsticks have arrived on shelves at an unfortunate time, when we have seen increasing numbers of famous names charged with child sexual abuse. Former Radio 1 DJ Mark Page was found guilty in March for abusing children as young as 12 and Prince Andrew was alleged to have sexually assaulted a 17-year-old girl. Ghislaine Maxwell has been the subject of a documentary and court case for her role in grooming underage women for Jeffrey Epstein. Arguably, such stories of predatory pedophilia reduce the sheen on these products, perhaps even make them offensive to women.
Tom Ford’s untimely lip products are for sale on Sephora
Ford is not new to controversy. His 2001 perfume advertisement for YSL’s Opium featured model Sophie Dhal stark naked, and the 2006 campaign for Gucci hides the face of the model whose pubic hair has been shaved into a “G”. The designer describes himself as an “equal opportunity objectifier- I’m just as happy to objectify men.” But in the era of MeToo, is fashion’s objectification of women starting to wear a bit thin?
The designer comes from a long line of gay men who sell fashion and beauty to women, while, unwittingly, making them victims of sexism. John Galliano turned his models into dolls, unable to walk or breathe properly in seven-inch heels and rubber suits for his 2003 collection for Christian Dior, Hard Core Romance. Giorgio Armani controversially came out in support of women, saying that it is a form of “rape” when women are shown provocatively and appear half-naked in advertisements.
“It sexualises young girls, without them knowing”
The distinction between playful product names and ones that infer sexism is becoming less obvious. We’ve become accustomed to the racy names seen on the shelves of Boots, from Soap and Glory’s Glow Job tinted moisturiser to Nars’s Deep Throat blush, but at what point do they start to become offensive? We carried out a survey to uncover what make-up fans thought and 44% said that Nars’s provocative product names were sexist and disrespectful rather than playful. Make-up fanatic Sophia Ford-Palmer argues, “it sexualises young girls without them knowing.”
Shade names that sought to communicate sexual liberation may have contributed to misogyny since the prevalence of post-sex makeup trends. The craze for the “post-O glow” is fuelled by products such as Nars’s Orgasm blush, of which one is sold every minute worldwide. The demand to achieve sex-induced flushed cheeks appeals to our desire to appear sexually prepared for potential partners. Ford instigated the trend during the 1990s with revolutionary make-up artist Linda Castello by pairing her invention, the smoky eye, with dewy skin and tousled hair.
Kylie shared her blush names with her teenage Snapchat followers
British women spend £10 billion annually on beauty and hair products and girls as young a 11 are contributing. Kylie Jenner, a role model to young girls worldwide, faced controversy in 2018 when her beauty brand, Kylie Cosmetics, released a new collection of blushes. The former billionaire was just 20 years old when she marketed the blushes named Barely Legal and Virginity to her teenage fan base. Consumers were outraged, considering Jenner’s teenage relationship with rapper Tyga. Jenner was reportedly 16 when she started dating then 24-year-old rapper Tyga. Our survey found that 87% of beauty fans thought the blush names promoted pedophilic ideals. Alice Jones, a Beauty Writer at Look Fantastic, says, “I’d never thought about it in this way before, but it definitely feeds into ideas of pedophilia. It’s just so unnecessary.”
In 2015, make-up artist Kat Von D came under fire for her lipstick named Underage Red. Much like Kylie Jenner, Von D’s followers are predominantly teenage girls. Fans and make-up fiends claimed Von D was promoting the sexualisation of young girls and a destructive lifestyle, to which the make-up artists responded to by placing the blame on critics, questioning how they would ever come to such disgusting conclusion. Urban Decay’s Perversion mascara is another culprit, slightly more sinister than Too Faced’s Better Than Sex mascara.
“Advertising is about making an arresting image and getting people to stop when they’re flicking through a magazine... whether they’re attracted or repelled by what they see”
Other brands have been accused of sexualising teenage consumers with their risqué branding and it seems trying too hard to be provocative can result in harmful, subliminal messages. Has fashion and beauty not surpassed the desire to shock? Ford believes “sensuality and sexuality is what drives so much” and admits he is always “looking to provoke” because “advertising is about making an arresting image and getting people to stop when they’re flicking through a magazine... whether they’re attracted or repelled by what they see”. This expands his fashion, beauty, and fragrance lines. To him, it is just marketing, but to young women, it may not always encourage the empowerment he desires to achieve. Make-up fan Phoebe Empringham says, “I feel like they’re trying to make some kind of socially aware statement, but it has backfired.”
These brands are in danger of tarnishing their name and driving away consumers at the price of being provocative. During an age where feminism is of major social significance, should women be putting their money where their mouth is?