Why men are wearing make-up to get ahead at work

The men in your office might have compacts in their man bags.

As might be expected, Asia – and China in particular, are now fundamental to the growth of the beauty and personal care multinationals such as L’Oreal and Estee Lauder. There is much discussion around the beauty rituals of South Korean women and the use of whitening creams by women in India and China. Beauty trends that originated in Asia, such as Beauty Balm or “BB” creams, are now the latest in skincare in the UK.

However, less is known about a major beauty trend in Asia that is now taking off in Europe and the US – the use of make-up by men. The aim appears to be, to quote an online male make-up retailer: “… to appear fresh, perfect and simply outstanding whilst maintaining a facial finish which doesn't jeopardise your alpha male status.”

The use of make-up by males in Asia is relatively high, driven by cultural and religious phenomena. In India, for instance, kohl is a common eye make-up applied by men on special occasions. But across grooming products not so commonly associated with men, skincare and make-up, men’s share is much higher than you’d think. Across these two sectors, men account for 51 per cent of the country’s personal grooming market in India; in China it’s 41 per cent.

Men in the UK and the US still have some way to go, although the fact that men use 22 per cent of make-up and skincare combined in Britain and 23 per cent of these products in America means consumption might still be above expectations.

So what’s driving this? It’s not just about trying to be more attractive, although that will certainly drive part of this. Men are increasingly concerned about how their looks can affect their career prospects. In South Korea for example, the use of make-up by men is seen as a way to improve looks and enhance your career, with companies like Korean Air even holding cosmetics training sessions for male employees ).

Up to now, the British and American male grooming markets have been largely fixed on hand creams and the odd facial cream; few British or American men currently take inspiration from Johnny Depp’s kohl-rimmed eyes in Pirates of the Caribbean. Yet the level of sophistication of male make-up products could be improved on from the current offerings of acne concealers and stage make-up a la Tony Blair, and the launch of nail polishes for men such as Alphanail shows that this is starting to change. The offerings for men from leading beauty companies such as Clarins and L’Oreal already extend to moisturisers, scrubs and the odd flash bronzer, so watch this space: the men in your office might soon have a compact in their man bag.

Emily Neill is the CEO of Canadean – (consumer market research experts)

Trying to make CEO. Photograph: Getty Images

Emily Neil is the CEO of Canadean

Getty
Show Hide image

Expressions of sympathy for terror's victims may seem banal, but it's better than the alternative

Angry calls for "something to be done" play into terrorists' hands.

No sooner had we heard of the dreadful Manchester Arena bombing and before either the identity of the bomber or the number of dead were known, cries of “something must be done” echoed across social media and the airwaves. Katie Hopkins, the Mail Online columnist, called for “a final solution”, a tweet that was rapidly deleted, presumably after she remembered (or somebody explained to her) its connotations. The Telegraph columnist Allison Pearson wanted “a State of Emergency as France has” and “internment of thousands of terror suspects”, apparently unaware that the Nice attack, killing 86, happened after that emergency was declared and that nobody has been interned anyway.

It cannot be said too often that such responses play into terrorists’ hands, particularly if Isis was behind the Manchester bombing. The group’s aim is to convince Muslims in the West that they and their families cannot live in peace with the in-fidel and will be safe only if they join the group in establishing a caliphate. Journalists, striving for effect, often want to go beyond ­banal expressions of sympathy for ­victims. (It’s a mistake I, too, have sometimes made.) But occasionally the banal is the appropriate response.

Pity begins at home

Mark Twain, writing about the “terror” that followed the French Revolution and brought “the horror of swift death”, observed that there was another, older and more widespread, terror that brought “lifelong death from hunger, cold, insult, cruelty and heartbreak”. The first, he wrote, we had been “diligently taught to shiver and mourn over”; the other we had never learned to see “in its vastness or pity as it deserves”.

That is true: more children across the world die each day from hunger or disease than could ever be killed in a terror attack. We should not forget them. Nor should we forget that the numbers killed in terrorist attacks in, for example, Baghdad far outnumber those killed in all European attacks of our times combined. In an age of globalisation, we should be more cosmopolitan in our sympathies but the immediacy of 24-hour news make us less so.

When all is said and done, however, pity, like charity, begins at home. We naturally grieve most over those with whom we share a country and a way of life. Most of us have been to concerts and some readers will have been to one at the Manchester Arena. We or our children could have been present.

Cheers from Highgate Cemetery

What a shame that Theresa May modified the Tory manifesto’s proposals on social care. For a few giddy days, she was proposing the most steeply progressive (or confiscatory, as the Tories would normally say) tax in history. True, it was only for those unfortunate enough to suffer conditions such as dementia, but the principle is what counts. It would have started at zero for those with assets of less than £100,000, 20 per cent for those with £120,000, 50 per cent for those worth £200,000, 99 per cent with those with £10m and so on, ad infinitum. Karl Marx would have been cheering from Highgate Cemetery.

Given that most people’s main asset – the value of their home – did not have to be sold to meet their care costs until death, this was in effect an inheritance tax. It had tantalising implications: to secure their inheritance, children of the rich would have had to care for their parents, possibly sacrificing careers and risking downward mobility, while the children of the poor could have dedicated themselves to seeking upward mobility.

The Tories historically favour, in John Major’s words, wealth cascading down the generations. In recent years they have all but abolished inheritance tax. Now they have unwittingly (or perhaps wittingly, who knows?) conceded that what they previously branded a “death tax” has some legitimacy. Labour, which proposes a National Care Service but optimistically expects “cross-party consensus” on how to finance it, should now offer the clarity about old age that many voters crave. Inheritance tax should be earmarked for the care service, which would be free at the point of use, and it should be levied on all estates worth (say) £100,000 at progressive rates (not rising above even 50 per cent, never mind 99 per cent) that yield sufficient money to fund it adequately.

Paul Dacre’s new darling

Paul Dacre, the Daily Mail editor, is in love again. “At last, a PM not afraid to be honest with you,” proclaimed the paper’s front page on Theresa May’s manifesto. Though the Mail has previously argued that to make old people use housing wealth to fund care is comparable to the slaughter of the first-born, an editorial said that her honesty was exemplified by the social care proposals.

On the morning of the very day that May U-turned, the Mail columnist Dominic Lawson offered a convoluted defence of the failure to cap what people might pay. Next day, with a cap announced, the Mail hailed “a PM who’s listening”.

Dacre was previously in love with Gordon Brown, though not to the extent of recommending a vote for him. What do Brown and May have in common? Patriotism, moral values, awkward social manners, lack of metropolitan glitz and, perhaps above all, no evident sense of humour. Those are the qualities that win Paul Dacre’s heart.

Sobering up

Much excitement in the Wilby household about opinion polls that show Labour reducing the Tories’ enormous lead to, according to YouGov, “only” 9 percentage points. I find myself babbling about ­“Labour’s lead”. “What are you talking about?” my wife asks. When I come to my senses, I realise that my pleasure at the prospect, after seven years of Tory austerity, of limiting the Tories’ majority to 46 – more than Margaret Thatcher got in 1979 – is a measure of my sadly diminished expectations. l

Peter Wilby was editor of the Independent on Sunday from 1995 to 1996 and of the New Statesman from 1998 to 2005. He writes the weekly First Thoughts column for the NS.

This article first appeared in the 25 May 2017 issue of the New Statesman, Why Islamic State targets Britain

0800 7318496