The Truth Behind Inclusive Beauty
The beauty industry has finally caught on: offering more than five variations of beige isn’t enough. In response to a growing backlash over its lack of inclusivity, brands have expanded their shade ranges and featured deeper-skinned models in campaigns. But what’s the point of having 40 shades if half of them don’t even work for the targeted audience?
Darker complexions are still battling foundations that oxidize or completely miss the mark on undertones. The issue isn’t about having the options but whether those options were actually designed with darker skin in mind. Too often, they aren’t.
Oxidation is one of the biggest culprits behind the downfall of deeper foundations. What looks perfect in the bottle morphs into a completely different color on the skin, thanks to ingredients like titanium dioxide and iron oxide—compounds that react to air, skin oils, and pH levels, subtly (or not so subtly) altering the shade post-application.
Titanium dioxide, often used as a pigment booster and sunscreen, enhances brightness and coverage in fairer shades. In relation to tailoring to deeper skin tones, it’s a different story. Instead of blending seamlessly, titanium dioxide overpowers rich pigments, leaving an ashy, washed-out finish. Rather than allowing deep tones to shine through, it dulls them, throwing undertones off balance.
Iron oxides, the primary pigments for deeper foundations, are equally as tricky. If not properly stabilized, the pigmentation of these complexions can dramatically shift once exposed to heat, light, or oxygen. They exist in different color variations, each derived from different oxidation states. Black iron oxide, for example, can oxidize further, pulling to red. Yellow iron oxide might lose water, throwing off the entire formula. The result? A shade that looked perfect at first but turns unwearable within hours.
At the root of the problem is a lack of thoughtful formulation. Too many brands rely on a surface-level approach, tweaking existing formulas for lighter skin instead of creating deep shades from the ground up. The disconnect starts with cosmetic chemists and product developers, who often don’t consider darker skin tones during formulation.
Another major flaw is testing—or lack thereof. The industry is prone to formulating deeper shades as an afterthought, assuming a single undertone will work across a broad range of deep skin tones. Instead of testing across a variety of complexions, many brands use a handful of models (if that), leading to miscalculations that could’ve been avoided with real research.
This lack of genuine interest in providing a spectrum of functional shade ranges doesn’t stop them from marketing themselves as “inclusive.” Some brands have even been called out for misrepresenting their products’ performance on darker skin. Take YSL Beauty’s Lavender Lust blush—advertised as universal, yet consumers quickly discovered its white base left an unflattering cast on deep complexions. The backlash was swift, with accusations of false advertising illustrating the industry’s continued failure to get it right.
One of the few professionals pushing back against these formulation failures is Magdalene Ekanem, CEO and Senior Cosmetic Chemist at Inveo Labs. She emphasizes that true inclusivity starts long before a marketing meeting. According to Ekanem, deeper shades require more than just an extra pump of pigment, they need intentional formulation from the beginning. The chemistry behind the foundation is expensive, but at its core, the issue is commitment. Beauty brands know how to get it right. They just don’t prioritize it.
Expanding a shade range is easy. Getting it right takes effort. If brands actually cared about inclusivity, they’d be fixing formulation issues and ensuring that deep shades perform for the people they claim to serve. Until that happens, all these expanded ranges are nothing more than a PR stunt.
Strike Out,
Writer: Salette Cambra
Editor: Emily Montarroyos
Graphic Designer: Kate LaPine
Tallahassee