Universal Makeup

Once upon a time, there was a thing called OSFA. It stood for “One Size Fits All” and was considered a legitimate clothing size.

Then people started saying things like “this is 4 feet too long” and “I can’t get this past my knees” and “is an 8 inch neck circumference really the norm for adults?” and various other responses to the One Size Fits All designation that translated to “the fuck it does”.

So the All in OSFA became Most, and OSFM is what we see on labels today. Still a rather bullshitty thing, but at least closer to the truth.

Now, I am here to ask that cosmetics companies take a page from the OSFM book and stop saying that any product is “universally flattering”.

There is no such thing as a lipstick or concealer or highlighter or powder that “works with all skin tones”. That is not a thing. If it were a thing, I would not in my lifetime have owned so many universally flattering products that ended up only flattering the bottom of a bathroom wastebasket.

Without wading too deep into the morass of cultural and societal bullshit that makes so many people feel like they need so much makeup in the first place, I will say this; imagine feeling like your bare face isn’t good enough for the world, buying a product that is marketed as making everyone look better, applying that product, and realizing you actually look worse than you did when you started.

One Shade Flatters All makeup wastes money, wastes product, wastes time, and isn’t particularly great for the self-esteem of the people who can’t wear it.

“Wide Range” would be a good replacement for “universally flattering”. More accurate, still appealing to the majority of the cosmetic-buying populace, and far less likely to make people wonder what’s wrong with their faces when they can’t wear the thing touted as wearable by All.
return to The Blog

5 people read this post.


Talk to me