The beauty and fashion industry, as we know it today, has its origins in exclusion, with systemic and socio-political implications. Considering the industry and its influence on modern consumer culture as something apolitical and merely a preference for individual expression is menacing. I am a feminist; I am political, and so are these photographs.

For a long time, the beauty and fashion industry has catered primarily to Eurocentric consumers, establishing standards that made people feel they needed to fit in through Western bourgeois ideals. Even though the term 'diversity' is now prevalent in marketing campaigns and fashion runways, with representation of plus-size, multiracial, ethnic minorities or transgender identity, diversity alone does not imply inclusion. Representation alone does not compensate for systemic and discriminatory exclusion.

From the standpoint of Halimatu Sadiya Awwal, a Muslim Nigerian Black woman pursuing her higher education in India, the industry's diversity efforts often appear tokenistic. Having anything other than white, slim, young, or heterosexual bodies continues to be considered 'other' in the pool of 'fair-normals.' Halima reflects, "In my country, women with light skin are respected and called precious. They are men's first choice. It made women like us bleach their skin just to feel heard among men and even women with lighter skin."

She further opines, "Even though there might now be a visible number of women from different backgrounds in beauty and fashion campaigns, their presence in those positions is seen as if they [beauty & fashion brands] had the big heart to let us in. However, that’s the space we always deserved.

Recently, beauty brands and companies have marketed themselves as "intersectional" and "inclusive," often using these terms to appeal to consumers concerned about diversity and representation. However, the cause is often fabricated to commodify diversity for profit, legitimizing the process without understanding the true contours of representation. Tokenistic inclusivity is how the capitalist world has twisted the importance of inclusivity into a brand value and an illusion of symbolic ‘hope.’

This fetishization of inclusivity by brands is built without genuinely engaging with its political importance, a privilege that remains with the upper class and caste. This absence of awareness prevents the privileged from connecting with the marginalized.

Drawing from Bell Hooks, “To be in the margin is to be part of the whole but outside the main body.

These branding strategies have become a spin on modern consumer culture, rendering the definition of inclusivity limited to what brings profit to businesses and reproducing prejudiced definitions of ‘beauty.’ This commodification of social justice movements and the reinforcement of class hierarchies by the fashion and beauty industry undermines marginalized communities' efforts to challenge systemic oppression.

By reducing social justice issues to marketable commodities, the industry trivializes the struggles of marginalized communities, reinforces existing power dynamics, and obscures the systemic nature of inequality. Therefore, without genuine intersectional inclusion of the “other” into the system, diversity marketing remains an aesthetic cosmetic illusion.

Credits:

Concept, Execution, Creative Director, Editor - Amisha Madnani
Talent - Halimatu Sadiya Awwal
Photography - Mohit Malik, Kuljeet Barman
Writers - Ritika, Daman Kaur, Amisha Madnani