The ever-ongoing RedHead campaign for equal representation of natural-looking women continues. Today, against my better judgement, I bought Company, interested to see if they have printed anything of my complaint about their double standard on summer skintones. Of course not, but that wouldn't be in their interest.
But I found something else to provoke my rage. And this one is far more obvious.
Observe, if you will, Exhibit A - a portfolio of Rimmel London's most recent faces.
Sophie Ellis-Bextor, Lily Cole, Coco Rocha and Georgia May Jagger. All different, all unique, all beautiful, and all true English roses. Interesting, the double standard was exposed to me by Company, who I am NOT slagging off here in the slightest. That exact Coco Rocha campaign appeared on a page of Company. Guess what was on the next page?
I give you Exhibit B...
Seriously? Really? (PS I took this photo myself - interestingly the campaign's not hit the 'net yet.)
I know I'm jumping the gun with this one, but if one of the UK's most popular, influential brands, bought by older wiser woman and impressionable young girls alike, is continuing to enforce the stereotype that this is the only way to be sexy...and it's not just that it's saying that a tan is sexy. It's saying that the woman's natural skintone, the pale shade, the exact shade of their four faces up there, is not. They're 'bold'. They've got the edgy, cool 'London look' that makes us Brits so cool yet so unpopular and unappreciated abroad. But are they sexy? It would seem even a brand this forward thinking doesn't think so...yet.
Help me out on this one gang. I got really riled.