Article: The Skincare Industry Told You You're Not Enough. We Disagree.
The Skincare Industry Told You You're Not Enough. We Disagree.
Let me ask you something. When did you last see a skincare advert that made you feel good about yourself - without first making you feel quietly terrible?
If you're struggling to answer that, you're not imagining it.
The global beauty industry is worth over $530 billion, and it isn't just women in its sights - men are increasingly targeted too. Thinning hair, ageing skin, body shape: the same playbook that has been used on women for decades is now being turned on men with equal aggression. A significant chunk of that $530 billion rests on a single, uncomfortable truth: insecurity is currency. In a capitalist society, to be insecure is to be in a constant state of being that is receptive to making a purchase [1]. The industry supplies the problem, then sells you the solution. Over and over again.
I find that genuinely enraging. And as someone who makes skincare for a living, I think it's important to say so out loud.
The problem that isn't a problem
Here's a tactic the beauty industry has refined over decades: invent a flaw, name it, then sell you the cure.
"Enlarged pores." "Dull skin." "Loss of firmness." "Uneven skin tone." "Thinning hair." "Undefined jawline." These aren't medical diagnoses - they're marketing categories, carefully designed to make normal, healthy bodies feel like something that needs fixing. And they work on anyone with a mirror and a moment of self-doubt.
Research describes a psychological phenomenon called compensatory consumption - when people feel insecure or inadequate, they are more likely to buy products that promise to restore what they feel is lacking. A threat to a consumer's self-esteem, confidence, or sense of control often results in the desire to purchase a product that can help restore it [1].
The marketing strategy isn't 'here's a lovely product.' It's 'here's a problem you didn't know you had — and here's what you need to fix it.'
"Look 10 years younger overnight"
The anti-ageing category is where this gets particularly murky. We are surrounded by products promising to reverse, erase, or turn back the clock on skin that is, by all biological measures, doing exactly what skin is supposed to do.
Anti-ageing marketing has become a fear-based framework - designed to keep people consumed with insecurity and buying products in response [2]. And it starts earlier than you might think. Nearly 20% of cosmetic Botox injections are now performed on women under 40 [2].
But here's what the science actually says about those miracle creams. The UK's Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) - the body that regulates beauty advertising - is unambiguous: moisturisers have a superficial effect on the surface of the skin [3]. They temporarily plump the skin with water and reduce moisture loss. That's genuinely useful. But it is not the same as reversing the ageing process, regenerating cells, or making you look a decade younger.
In fact, the ASA's own published guidance states that marketers should not refer to the prevention, delaying, or masking of premature ageing in anything other than temporary terms [4]. Claims like "look 5 years younger in just a month" or "reverses the cellular ageing process" have been repeatedly investigated and found to be misleading. The ASA has upheld complaints against major brands for exactly this kind of language - including rulings against Avon, L'Oréal, and several collagen supplement brands [3][4].
No cream will make you look ten years younger overnight. Any brand telling you otherwise is not being straight with you.
The numbers behind the pressure
This isn't just a personal frustration - the research is stark.
According to Dove's landmark research, only 4% of women around the world consider themselves beautiful - and only 11% of girls globally are comfortable describing themselves that way. Meanwhile, 72% of girls feel tremendous pressure to be beautiful [5].
Dove's 2024 Real State of Beauty Report - the largest study ever conducted by a beauty brand, surveying over 33,000 people across 20 countries - found that 40% of women would give up a year of their life to achieve an ideal appearance. Two in three women said they felt more pressure to be physically attractive than their mother's generation was [6].
Perhaps most strikingly: 69% of women admit to not attending social engagements because of low body confidence [7]. And seven in ten women and girls believe media and advertising set a standard of beauty that most can never achieve [8].
They know it's unrealistic. And they still feel the pressure. That's how effective this kind of marketing is.
A 2025 academic study published in the Australasian Marketing Journal confirmed what many people already know instinctively: guilt-inducing beauty adverts measurably increase feelings of insecurity, while ads featuring realistic portrayals of real people increase confidence [9].
Even the brands championing "real beauty" aren't what they seem
I've just cited Dove's research several times. And that data is real - the statistics are drawn from genuine studies. But I think it's important to be honest about the source, because Dove is itself a perfect illustration of the very problem this blog is about.
Dove has spent two decades telling women they are beautiful just as they are. It's a powerful campaign. But Dove is owned by Unilever - a corporation that simultaneously sold Fair & Lovely, a skin-whitening cream marketed across India, Southeast Asia, and the Middle East. The adverts for Fair & Lovely routinely depicted dark-skinned women as socially rejected and professionally overlooked - unable to find love or land a job - until they lightened their skin [10][11].
At the same time, Unilever also owned Lynx - a brand built almost entirely on the sexual objectification of women, with adverts so provocative they were frequently banned. As Dr Susan Linn, co-founder of the Campaign for a Commercial-Free Childhood, put it: "The Axe campaign makes clear that any concerns Unilever has about girls' well-being take a backseat to their desire to exploit stereotypes for profit" [12].
Academics who have studied this describe it as 'genderwashing' - using progressive, empowering language in one brand while simultaneously exploiting the very same insecurities through another [13]. One hand holds up a sign saying 'real beauty.' The other is quietly selling the message that darker skin makes you less worthy of love.
|
Under significant public pressure following global protests in 2020, Unilever announced it would rename Fair & Lovely — removing words like 'fair' and 'light' from the packaging. It did not stop selling the product [11]. |
That tells you everything you need to know about where the priorities actually lie.
I'm not saying the Dove statistics aren't worth reading - they are. But it's worth knowing who funded them, and why. Real change in this industry doesn't come from the corporations that profit from the problem. It comes from smaller, independent brands choosing to do things differently.
Hormonal changes are real. Shame about them isn't necessary.
Here's what I do believe in talking about honestly: our skin changes throughout our lives, and a lot of those changes are driven by hormones.
Teenagers dealing with breakouts. Women noticing shifts during pregnancy, perimenopause, and menopause. The way stress, poor sleep, and cycle changes show up on your face the next morning. These are real, biological, entirely normal things that happen to real bodies.
What isn't necessary is the shame that gets layered on top of them.
Menopausal skin - drier, sometimes more sensitive, with less elasticity - isn't a problem to be corrected with a £200 serum. It's skin with different needs. Often simpler, more nourishing ones. Supporting your skin through hormonal changes is genuinely worthwhile. Being made to feel that those changes make you less attractive, less visible, or less worthy? That's the industry talking, not science.
What skincare can actually do (and it's still quite a lot)
I want to be clear: I'm not anti-skincare. I've dedicated years of my life to making it. But I believe in being honest about what it actually does.
Good skincare - the real kind - supports your skin barrier. It keeps skin hydrated, calm, and protected. It delivers plant-based nutrients that work with your skin's own biology. It can make your skin feel more comfortable, look healthier, and cope better with environmental stress. Over time, consistent care genuinely makes a difference.
What it cannot do is reverse the ageing process. It cannot restructure your face. It cannot make you look like you did at 25.
And honestly? You don't need to look like you did at 25. You looked great then. You look great now. Differently - but great.
Why we do things differently at Puremess
When James and I started Puremess, we made a deliberate decision: we would never market to your insecurities. We would never invent a problem and sell you the solution. We would never use the language of 'fix', 'correct', or 'reverse' - because your skin doesn't need fixing.
What we make are honest, plant-based formulations - oils, butters, waxes, and botanicals - that nourish and support your skin. The Oat & Mandarin Cleanser gently removes what doesn't belong without stripping what does. The Rejuvenating Face Cream gives your skin the lipids it loves. These things work not because they promise miracles, but because they work with your skin, not against it.
We package everything in amber glass, biodegradable card, or prevented ocean plastic - because the health of your skin and the health of the planet are connected. And we talk to you like an adult who deserves to know the truth.
That's it. No invented problems. No fear. No genderwashing. Just really good skincare, made honestly, in Chichester.
A note before you go
Next time you see a skincare advert that makes you feel like you're not enough - that your pores are too big, your lines too deep, your skin too old, or your jaw not quite sharp enough - I want you to remember that the feeling was engineered. It was put there on purpose, by people who profit from it.
You were enough before you opened the app. You're enough now.
Your skin just needs a bit of nourishment - not a miracle.
Gemma
Founder, Puremess Skincare
Made with love (and a lot of oat beta-glucan) in Chichester
FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS
Can skincare creams really make you look younger?
No cream can reverse the ageing process or make you look significantly younger overnight. The UK Advertising Standards Authority is clear that moisturisers work superficially - they temporarily plump the skin with water and reduce moisture loss. That's genuinely beneficial, but it isn't the same as reversing ageing. Any brand claiming otherwise is not being straightforward with you.
Is it normal for skin to change during hormonal shifts like perimenopause?
Completely normal. Hormonal changes throughout life - including puberty, pregnancy, perimenopause, and menopause - affect the skin in real, biological ways. Menopausal skin tends to be drier, more sensitive, and less elastic. These aren't flaws; they're skin with different needs. Gentle, nourishing skincare that supports the skin barrier is far more helpful than expensive serums making unrealistic promises.
Why does the beauty industry make people feel bad about their skin?
Research shows it's deliberate. Studies describe a psychological phenomenon called compensatory consumption - when people feel insecure or inadequate, they are more likely to buy products that promise to restore what they feel is lacking. The beauty industry has refined this into a marketing strategy: create or amplify an insecurity, then sell the solution. It's profitable, but it comes at a real cost to people's self-esteem - men and women alike.
What does the research say about women and beauty standards?
The statistics are striking. According to Dove's Real State of Beauty Report, only 4% of women globally consider themselves beautiful, and 40% say they would give up a year of their life to achieve an ideal appearance. Seven in ten women believe that media and advertising set standards of beauty that are impossible to meet. These findings are consistent across decades of research.
Isn't Dove a positive example of honest beauty marketing?
Dove's research into beauty standards and self-esteem is genuinely valuable. But Dove is owned by Unilever, which simultaneously sold Fair & Lovely - a skin-whitening cream marketed across Asia and the Middle East - and owned Lynx, a brand built on the objectification of women. Academics describe this as 'genderwashing': empowering language in one brand, while exploiting the same insecurities through another. It's worth knowing the full picture.
What should I look for in an honest skincare brand?
Look for brands that talk about what their products actually do - support the skin barrier, maintain hydration, nourish with plant-based ingredients - rather than promising transformation or reversal. Be wary of before-and-after photography, claims about 'looking younger', and language like 'repairs', 'reverses', or 'regenerates' without clear published evidence. Honest skincare doesn't need to invent a problem first.
What makes Puremess different from mainstream skincare brands?
Puremess is a small-batch, natural skincare brand made in Chichester using oils, butters, waxes, and botanicals - ingredients that work with your skin's own biology. We don't use fear-based marketing, we don't invent problems, and we don't make claims we can't back up. Everything we make is packaged sustainably in amber glass, biodegradable card, or prevented ocean plastic. We believe your skin deserves honest nourishment, not miracle promises.
SOURCES & FURTHER READING
[1] Wellisch, A. (2022). 'The cosmetic industry has benefited from women's insecurities for too long.' The Brown Daily Herald. browndailyherald.com
[2] Defino, J. (2023). 'There's no ethical way to sell products that target signs of aging.' jessicadefino.substack.com. jessicadefino.substack.com
[3] Advertising Standards Authority (ASA). 'Beauty and Cosmetics: Creams.' UK regulatory guidance on anti-ageing claims and moisturiser advertising. asa.org.uk
[4] Advertising Standards Authority (ASA). 'Beauty and Cosmetics: Cumulative Effects.' UK regulatory guidance on persistent claims in beauty advertising. asa.org.uk
[5] Dove. 'The Real Truth About Beauty: Revisited.' Dove Self-Esteem Project global research. dove.com
[6] Unilever / Dove. (2024). '20 years on: Dove and the future of Real Beauty.' Includes findings from the Real State of Beauty Report. unilever.com
[7] Dove / PR Newswire. (2025). 'Let go of the Pursuit of Perfect.' Findings from the 2024 Real State of Beauty Report. prnewswire.com
[8] Dove Self-Esteem Project. 'Key Statistics.' Global research on body image and advertising. dovepressroom.com
[9] Enriquez, A., Paik, S., & Moon, Y.E. (2025). 'The Impact of Cosmetic and Beauty Campaigns on Women's Mentality.' Australasian Marketing Journal. journals.sagepub.com
[10] The Conversation. (2017). 'Dove, real beauty and the racist history of skin whitening.' Analysis of the Dove/Unilever controversy and Fair & Lovely. theconversation.com
[11] CBS News. (2020). 'Unilever to rename skin-lightening cream in India after outcry.' Covers the Fair & Lovely rebrand under public pressure. cbsnews.com
[12] In-Mind Magazine. 'The good, the bad, and the ugly of the Dove Campaign for Real Beauty.' Academic analysis of the Dove/Axe/Fair & Lovely contradiction. Includes quote from Dr Susan Linn, Campaign for a Commercial-Free Childhood. in-mind.org
[13] Open Case Studies, UBC. 'Dove's Real Beauty Campaign: Body Positive Promotion or Genderwashing?' Academic case study on Unilever's multi-brand contradictions. cases.open.ubc.ca
Ecrit par Gemma Cockrell
