By John Q. Hosedrinker 
L’Oréal’s Urban Decay brand has sparked controversy by enlisting Ari Kytsya, an adult performer known for her OnlyFans content, as a brand ambassador. This decision has raised concerns from women’s rights advocates regarding the mainstreaming of explicit content and its potential impact on young women, particularly given Kytsya’s promotion of the adult content creation industry. Despite L’Oréal’s defense, citing Kytsya’s authenticity, the move appears to conflict with the company’s own “Value Charter”. The advertisement on Urban Decay’s TikTok page has been viewed millions of times, prompting debate on the evolving landscape of advertising and the blurring lines between mainstream and adult content.
Read the original article here
L’Oréal hires OnlyFans star to market makeup popular with teenagers, and the internet is abuzz. Honestly, it’s a move that’s sparked a lot of conversation, and it’s pretty easy to see why. The beauty industry, especially brands like Urban Decay, known for their edgy image, have always pushed boundaries. However, this particular choice, hiring an adult content creator, has really gotten people talking, and it’s not hard to see why.
The crux of the issue seems to be the potential conflict between marketing to a younger audience, in this case, teenagers, and the association with adult content. Some people find this a blatant attempt at grabbing attention, a form of “rage bait” marketing, playing on the shock factor. Others see it as simply the evolution of a brand known for its alternative approach, not necessarily a sign of moral decay. The argument of over-sexualization of society, and the potential negative psychological impacts on children and teenagers, is a very real one.
The reality is that a lot of influencers are doing side gigs that include adult content. The lines are blurring in the online world. There are influencers and celebrities who have posed nude or done softcore porn to earn money. It’s a career, and it can pay well. There are many successful content creators who discuss the potential downsides and encourage others to build a solid foundation of other skills and education, before making the leap into the industry.
The interesting point here is whether this partnership actually targets teenagers. According to many, the makeup isn’t necessarily marketed exclusively to that age group. It’s likely that the brand is looking to reach a broader audience of young adults. This raises the question of whether the outrage is justified. The world is not going to stop turning because someone’s favorite makeup brand hired an adult content creator.
Another part of the debate revolves around double standards. Some people point out the hypocrisy in criticizing this move, while simultaneously accepting the oversexualized portrayals of beauty that are so common in mainstream media. Many advertisements glamorize unattainable beauty standards. Some even suggest that these standards do far more psychological harm to young people than the association with an adult content creator ever could.
It’s also worth noting that Urban Decay has a history of pushing boundaries. They’ve used provocative shade names in the past. This seems consistent with their overall brand image. So, it’s not surprising that they would choose someone who is, to put it mildly, not considered mainstream.
Some have criticized the framing of the whole story. The headlines are designed to get clicks. The story is simply a megacorporation hiring a model. No one is being forced to buy the product.
So, is this a revolutionary marketing move, or a sign of a society that has lost its moral compass? Ultimately, the reaction comes down to personal values and the lens through which the situation is viewed. It highlights the ongoing dialogue about the intersection of sexuality, advertising, and societal norms in the modern digital world. Whether it’s a good thing or a bad thing, this is certainly not the last time a company attempts to connect with consumers in an unexpected manner.