Just yesterday my good friend Agnes mentioned she had seen a commercial on television advertising a new line of makeup that is targeted towards 8 year olds. I immediately started scoping the internet for more information.
Set to launch on February 25 is a makeup line dedicated to 8 – 12 year olds named “GeoGirl” and will be sold exclusively at Walmart. The line offers 69 different products ranging from glittery mascara, to nail polish, blushes, eyeliners, and even creams that contain anti-aging exfoliants. The names of the products are also in a “tweeny” text style, like BCNU (“be seeing you”) powder or SWAK (“sent with a kiss”) lip gloss. It is also incredibly affordable, with the price ranges between $1 and $6.
Obviously the first thing I looked for was an ingredients list, but because the line hasn’t been released, the ingredients’ aren’t yet known. One of the brands’ selling powers, however, is that it is considered “environmental and natural” which helps to sell to moms and keep their daughter’s baby soft skin un-harmed. The line is said to be free from phthalates, parabens, and sulfates and comes in recyclable packaging which according to the industry is “completely natural”. There are still a lot more chemicals this brand could contain, so until I see a list I will not trust its “naturalness”.
GeoGirl is a creation of a company called Pacific World. The brand will basically be taking the place of the “Mary Kate and Ashley Olsen” line, but with more “mature” cosmetic options. For the most part, GeoGirl has been negatively received. Parents are questioning whether or not young girls should be consumed in the world of makeup and apparently exfoliation at such a tender age. Shouldn’t they be outside playing? And not only will that, at what point will your skin be more natural and clear than when you’re 8?? Any review on the Skin Deep Database can prove anti-aging chemicals do the opposite of what they are marketed for, and usually at a very steep price!
In a particular article I read from the Wall Street Journal, they interviewed Bobbi Brown, of Bobbi Brown cosmetics (owned by Estee Lauder). She says makeup is “fun for them, it’s not a big deal, making it taboo is the problem.” Yes, she would say something along those lines, since the chemicals invested in her company are nothing short of the high hazard zone on Skin Deep (Bobbi Brown Blush rating). The article went on to speak of how using makeup creates a “bonding experience” between mothers and daughters. One mother in particular says she allows her daughter to use M.A.C. makeup because of the “quality.” At this time there is no testing on Skin Deep for M.A.C. cosmetics, however a quick glance at their ingredients list spells out the toxicity quite clearly.

Bobbi Brown and Estee Lauder are not reliable sources when it comes to the safety of cosmetics and the health of young girls
What is most profound is that the line is basically targeting moms as well! Moms make the choices of whether or not their daughters will indulge in this line. It is critical that moms everywhere read ingredients’ labels to ensure that what their daughters are using is perfectly natural (which includes every other product they have the chance of using).
But what do we take from the societal standpoint? I remember putting some blush and eyeshadow on my 8 year old cousin for New Year’s Eve (natural makeup of course – see Cheeky Cosmetics). But that is much different than her having a makeup bag to herself, applying anti-aging exfoliants, and mascara, and then undoubtedly heading off to school! I don’t even want to see young girls worrying about whether or not they are beautiful because they aren’t wearing makeup. Wearing a little natural coloured lip balm is one thing, but to have a sculpted beauty routine so young almost robs them of the freedom they have to just be kids!
I would be quite interested to hear what parents think on this issue, so please reply! Check out the posted articles on the subject to see both sides of the story!
Articles:
- The Wall Street Journal: “It’s just lipgloss, Mom”
- Eco Salon: “Walmart and GeoGirl: Growing up is for keeps.”
- The Daily Cardinal: “Walmart exploits tweens”
- “Walmart, Pacific World give sneak peek at GeoGirl”
- ABC News: “Are tweens too young for makeup?”
Learn the Label, Love the Label ..xo
5 Responses to “GeoGirl”: New cosmetics line targeted to 8 year olds
Leave a Reply Cancel reply
-
Calendar
May 2013 M T W T F S S « Mar 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 -
Meta






This is craziness.
I totally agree with what you said, especially this: “…But that is much different than her having a makeup bag to herself, applying anti-aging exfoliants, and mascara, and then undoubtedly heading off to school! I don’t even want to see young girls worrying about whether or not they are beautiful because they aren’t wearing makeup.”
There is enough pressure already on young girls, trying to grow up in the world and figure out what it means to be a woman, especially when they are still in their “awkward stages” (haha, we all know what that means!).
Make-up should NOT be targeted at this age range. These girls will be so influenced by their peers, and I cannot see this being a positive thing. I can picture it now… walking into my grade 2 class in a few years when I’m a teacher, and seeing these girls all decked out in makeup for school. bahhhhh!!!
And seriously – anti-aging exfoliants?!! That must be a joke.
Sadly, I know it’s not.
I am in total agreement with you, and Alyssa who commented previously. There are two distinct issues here; one being about toxic vs. organic cosmetics, and the other is the question about the choice/pressures to wear makeup in the first place. Yes, makeup can be fun, but if girls see that the women in their lives won’t leave the house without putting on makeup, what sort of message does this send them? Women are the ones who are perpetuating the cosmetic industry, the same women who girls look to for role models. Girls need strong female role models, to prepare them for the future; women who think for themselves, who fight against society’s girl-poisoning messages. Maybe we, as women, need to think more seriously about our own beliefs and behaviours.
Absolutely! It’s great to hear comments such as these. It almost turns into a cycle: women idealize supermodels and movie stars who are perpetuating a “look” or trend, we try to emulate them, our daughters emulate us, and the cosmetics industry tries to find a way to make money but providing us with products options that will help us reach the ideal “look.” Meanwhile, the ones that are overlooked are the growing girls who are trying to find their place in society, and unfortunately try to fit the mold that we might be trying to fit…In the end, we are the ones creating the environment where products like “GeoGirl” become something to be excited about. We most definitely have to question our behaviours! Thanks for both comments!
FemmeToxic (BCAM) and Girls Action Foundation from Montreal recently commented on this issue in the Toronto Star.
Nice Blog with Excellent information