New Straits Times (Malaysia)
January 7, 2007

TALKING about make-up, I wasn't surprised to read in the New Straits Times that Malaysian women spend RM1.2 billion a year to make themselves look pretty.

According to the report, the starting age at which they apply make-up has gone down from 18 to 14 and they now continue to use make-up right until they are in their 70s.

I remember an aunt who was never seen without lipstick and heavy make-up. This was in the Sixties and Seventies, a time when Indian women were generally disinclined to adopt Western ways. She was the only relative who lived in Kuala Lumpur then.

Women apply cosmetics because they want to look more beautiful. Studies show that, to some extent, beautiful women tend to be more successful. One reason is that the feeling of being pretty, and therefore more attractive or acceptable, gives them added confidence.

But it is the prevailing concept of physical beauty that raises some concern. What does it mean to be beautiful? Does it only mean being slim and shapely with a pretty face? Is not someone who is kindly, courteous and trustworthy beautiful too?

Cosmetics companies and apparel makers want us to believe that the models parading their products are the epitome of beauty. The celluloid world impinges on reality by surreptitiously suggesting in subliminal messages that film stars and pop singers are the true representatives of beauty.

Aishwarya Rai, Trisha, Fashah Sandha, Zhang Zi Yi, Christy Chung, Shakira, Naomi Campbell, Claudia Schiffer, Halle Berry and Jennifer Lopez are among the faces - and bodies - many associate with beauty.

Cosmetic firms have also lodged themselves in the male ego by running advertisements which suggest that the man every woman finds delicious, the man who is in charge, the man who is crowned by success, is the man who uses their products.

I'm afraid the media is also to blame for the prevailing concept of female beauty. Images of women with slim bodies, rounded bottoms, and well-endowed chests bombard us when we watch television or go to the movies. And, don't forget, the handsome, hunky man always gets his girl.

But in applying make-up, are women, and men, rubbing carcinogens and untested chemicals on their skin?

Many consumer groups have warned that chemicals detrimental to health such as formaldehyde, petroleum, benzene and lead are used in the manufacture of many of these products.

The Environmental Working Group in the US says industrial chemicals are basic ingredients in personal care products.

"Personal care products contain carcinogens, pesticides, reproductive toxins, endocrine disruptors, plasticisers, degreasers and surfactants. They are the chemical industry in a bottle."

The group found that pre-market safety testing was not required by the authorities and that some of the ingredients "are downright dangerous". It adds that "89 per cent of the 10,500 ingredients the Food and Drugs Administration has determined are used in personal care products have not been evaluated for safety" either by the FDA or any publicly accountable institution.

But the Terminator has brought some cheer to those who want cosmetic manufacturers to come clean. Last October, California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger signed into law a requirement that manufacturers disclose product ingredients found on the list of chemicals that cause cancer or birth defects.

It is the first state in the US to have such a law. I applaud Mr Muscle for training his guns on cancer-causing chemicals.

It is about time cosmetic manufacturers were forced to print information on ingredients used on the labels. But then the cosmetics lobby is very rich and powerful.



x