A recent skincare product launch aimed at giving babies a tan has ignited a storm of online criticism, with a viral LinkedIn post calling it “colourism for cribs.”
The product, launched by the brand OMUMSIE, was intended to appeal to parents looking for a cute and comforting baby skincare option. However, for writer Shantesh S. Row, the product seemed much darker in its implications. In his widely shared post, Row questioned whether the brand viewed brown skin as a flaw or simply as a marketing tool.
Row took to LinkedIn with a powerful critique, labeling the product as “soul-damaging” rather than skincare. He condemned the brand for suggesting that a baby’s natural complexion was insufficient, comparing the product to fairness creams—products historically marketed to lighten skin—and calling it an affront to babies’ self-worth. “This is not just a bad ad,” he stated. “This is fairness culture dusted off, perfumed, and weaponized against babies.”
The post quickly went viral, striking a chord with thousands who saw it as an example of colonial beauty ideals still influencing today’s consumer culture. “You’re not just selling lotion,” one commenter wrote, “you’re selling shame.”
Criticism extended beyond the product itself to the underlying message: a cultural preference for lighter skin that continues to affect even the youngest and most vulnerable members of society. Row emphasized that “no baby should be a billboard for whitewashed beauty standards.”
The backlash has sparked a global conversation on how colourism can infiltrate children’s lives from an early age and how brands should be held accountable for perpetuating harmful beauty ideals.
As beauty brands strive to modernize and diversify, Row’s post serves as a stark reminder that “representation without reflection is just rebranding old prejudice.” Whether OMUMSIE will respond or rebrand remains to be seen, but the message is loud and clear: melanin is not a flaw to be marketed, and babies are not the canvas for such harmful ideals.
Related topics:
