Thanks to humanstupidity for sending me the link to this video:
Here is my comment:
Is there any evidence it all started with slavery? All over the world light skin is preferred over dark skin, whether there is a history of slavery or not. It’s that way in Africa and India too, and in the Arab world. Not only that, but this has been the case at least since Biblical times. So no, it is not “the white man’s fault”.
Also, why the emphasis on females? Isn’t it true that black women, even the lighter ones, have a preference for dark-skinned men?
If this is a problem, why not go after the media – that insists on portraying black men with white women so frequently? We should insist that they show white men with black women more often – but I don’t see this happening any time soon.
It should also be noted, though it is not nice to say it, that most of the women in that video would be ugly regardless of their skin color. The more I think about it, the more the movie looks like a (pardon the expression) bitch session for ugly women. I also wonder if they have figured out that choosing dark-skinned men for their “baby-daddies” causes their daughters to be dark-skinned. Perhaps genetics is not their forte’.
What is the link between dark skin and ugliness? In my view, a woman can be both very dark and very beautiful; I don’t see a contradiction. But most of the world disagrees with me. Most of the world has disagreed with me for a very long time. Therefore handsome, high-status, males would generally marry light-skinned women. We certainly see that trend today, whether it’s sports stars or royalty. There is also the rough correlation between higher I.Q.’s and lighter skin color. Higher I.Q.’s mean a better shot at higher social status. Higher status means more options in women. More options means the higher I.Q. men will pick lighter skinned women. The cycle reinforces itself. Over generations, the result would be that good-looking people would tend to be lighter-skinned and have higher I.Q.’s.
Ironically, the above dynamic might work more efficiently in a mixed-up, multiracial, world. Such a society would end up being highly polarized based on I.Q. as described in The Bell Curve. Except that light skin and good looks would also be concentrated at the right of the curve. Those women in the video are essentially complaining that they were born too far on the left of the bell curve when it comes to looks. Their descendants are likely to be on the left of the bell curve when it comes to I.Q. as well.
I watched the video and read a lot of the comments. The comments were unanimous that “colorism” as they called it was a completely black phenomenon. Dark africans complained their lighter friends and relatives didn’t see them as attractive because they were too dark or had “nappy” hair. And the light africans complained they were harassed and bullied for not being “black enough” or thinking they were “too good”. This is an entirely black thing. And yet they still blamed whites saying it was a “legacy of slavery” and that it was “done to them”. In my opinion, the first step to addressing this issue would be to realize it was self-inflicted and take responsibility for it. The first step to solving any problem is very often to admit that it is in fact one’s own fault. Even when one isn’t wholly or even personally responsible the willingness to accept some of the blame often helps one to get past the blame game so that they can move on to the solution.
It’s also important to note that whether or not you consider it immoral, miscegenation has a pretty complex list of consequences. The whole “colorism” phenomenon in American black culture is very odd and unfortunate and I don’t claim to understand it. The closest analogy in my life is when a bunch of folks I know go an hang out in the sun and the least pale of us teases the palest for needing a ton of sunblock, or for being a lobster.
It’s pretty well-known how racist black people are. Given how much they inflict it on whites and Koreans there’s no reason to be surprised that they inflict it on each other.
I’ve long thought that we need to find some way to address the psychological problems that come from being ugly. Being ugly is hard, no matter what, and good-looking people get better treatment. All this self-esteem claptrap, “Everyone is beautiful” is a little bit insulting. Same with the idea that “beauty is just a cultural trap.” It’s not and everyone knows it.
Christ, how long until we get “pulchritude privilege” conferences? Yeah, that’ll be enriching.
I’m not advocating plastic surgery, especially at the taxpayer’s expense! But the current paradigm is very skewed. Maybe less attractive people could go to charm school, and the women could learn to cook? That would be more productive than documentaries and “we shall overcome” rhetoric.
See, this is where your supposedly noble hbd pursuits become plain old hate, serving as entertainment.
Out of curiosity, which of the women in that video did you find attractive?
Is it automatically “hate” if I call somebody ugly? For your information, I don’t consider myself to be attractive either, yet I do not hate myself. I can’t help it if people use “ugly” as an insult any more than I can help it that people use “stupid” as an insult.
But so what if I do make fun of blacks sometimes. Do you get upset whenever you see the media, or blacks, making fun of whites? It happens all the time. It doesn’t necessarily indicate hate either though, if it’s done all the time, it could.
Are you freaking serious?
The trailer was quite good about describing the problem, but to blame its existence on slavery is misplaced. As others have pointed out, lighter females are considered more attractive in most part of world, like India, Indonesia and the Middle East.. Even for Caucasians, among whom it’s common for women to darken their skin, the nationality most commonly cited as the paradigm of feminine beauty is Swedes.
” lighter females are considered more attractive in most part of world, like India, Indonesia”. Both India and Indonesia experienced European Colonialism,thus it a justifiable theory for the “colorism” around the world! In South East Asia historically darker skin was associated with field workers and labours and if you had lighter skin it meant you where of a high social status. One can look at “colorism” in the same light you do Tanning because the former is not associated with racist and colonial ideologies.
Did you read my initial comment? The preference for lighter skin goes back way before colonialism. Furthermore, is there any actual evidence that colonialism actually altered people’s perceptions of beauty? I don’t think so.
Listed below are links to data on the Historical MYTH
of a Color-Based / Slave-Role HIERARCHY — as well
as the Urban LEGEND of Paper-Bag, Blue-Vein and
Other Allegations of Features-Based Entry ‘TESTS’:
ONLINE LINEAGE-DISCUSSION GROUPS / COMMUNITIES: