Jump to content

Talk:Discrimination based on skin tone: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Line 113: Line 113:


Does anyone else find it odd that this article talks about discrimination based on skin colour by African Americans, Asians, Latin Americans, Arabs and Africans, but not by white Americans or Europeans? Seems to me we're missing something important there! If you came to this article without knowing anything about history, it would make you think that white people are the only group that ''don't'' discriminate based on skin colour. I bet I can guess what the majority ethnicity of Wikipedia is... [[User:Robofish|Robofish]] ([[User talk:Robofish|talk]]) 16:43, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
Does anyone else find it odd that this article talks about discrimination based on skin colour by African Americans, Asians, Latin Americans, Arabs and Africans, but not by white Americans or Europeans? Seems to me we're missing something important there! If you came to this article without knowing anything about history, it would make you think that white people are the only group that ''don't'' discriminate based on skin colour. I bet I can guess what the majority ethnicity of Wikipedia is... [[User:Robofish|Robofish]] ([[User talk:Robofish|talk]]) 16:43, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

== need to scrap all content and start whole article anew ==

Can please who is in charge just please erase this whole article and strat with a NEW text altogether from the beginning ? It is OK to keep th etitle, but then in the first paragraph one has to CLARIFY that this type of discrimination has VARIOUS ASPECTS, and in which aspects is it different from Racism. ONE MUST CLEARLY DEFINE the WORDS one is using before moving in with the "who said what and when and why", etc. PLEASE THIS IS A VERY SENSITIVE ISSUE, A VERY IMPORTANT SUBJECT, so please wikipedia contributors, I KNOW you can do better than that.

Revision as of 18:37, 19 May 2011

Extremely Poor Article

There are several long sections in this article that are well beneath Wikipedia standards (and indeed beneath most other reasonable standards). In particular, the section 'African-Americans in the United States' from the sixth paragraph onwards ("Along with the above example...") - full of poor syntax and POV terms, completely un-encyclopedic in tone and direction, with barely any citations, all in run-on paragraphs. "Malcolm X said blacks were taught "self-hate" and he was, and still is, right"? In an encyclopedic article? Oh really?

'Colorism in South Asia' needs some work as well - in particular, disentangling the opening jumble about Communist revisionist theories and their relation (or lack thereof) to British colonial ideologies. It's all thrown into a blender and extremely hard to follow. 79.176.200.10 (talk) 01:09, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have a feeling that that Malcolm X paragraph may be a direct quote from the source given as a citation. I'm going to remove it for now. Hadrian89 (talk) 15:19, 22 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Does this phrase actually exist?

Is "colorism" actually a word thats used in any substantial context (e.g. in the study of racial prejudice), or is it just a word that was made up by Americans with a black/white racial mentality and hasn't actually been taken up in any popular or academic context? Either way, shouldn't the history of the word be noted in the first paragraph, considering it's a term that would have most people frowning in confusion? 118.138.220.68 (talk) 00:46, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've never even heard the world "colorism" used at all; from reading this article it seems the same as racism but with more political correctness attached. Geoking66talk 09:54, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Isn´t there already a word for this; racism? Why another word for the same thing?? --Oddeivind (talk) 21:01, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Directionality Issue

I just wanted to note that colorism has no set directionality (Comm term...I know the word "directionality" does not actually exist) as stated on the article page. Especially in the African American community, colorism discriminates against both darker skinned and lighter skinned people. Through out different periods in Black history you can see the fluctuating of what's considered "beautiful" or "acceptable."

                                                                                      --R. McBride

Colorism in Indian Society

In India light skin is deemed more beautiful, in both men and women. Indian actors and actress almost always have milky white skin, or use lots of makeup to made to look lighter. Actress Bipasha Basu who has darker skin then most other Indian actress, has been made to look lighter through makeup and her pictures are airbrused for the same person. Indians have many skin colors, ranging from white to black and everything inbetween. This attitude has been engrained and many Indian's think its natural to think light skin is more beautiful then dark skin. The cause of this is probally related to European colonialism in the 18th, 19th and 20th century. There is also a possibility that the Indian caste system plays a part in this colorism.

i have added the above to the article, i think this should be apart of it, please add information to it if any of you have any.



The color caste system exists everywhere!

Fair skin is valued more than darker and fairness is equated with beauty. In the US this is an outgrowth of the plantation politics where African women were raped by their masters', and the offspring were treated relatively favorably: They were often allowed to work in the house. Their fair skin was considered less offensive to white people than natural skin tones of the original Africans. He may have also felt compassion for his offspring. White women, of course, struggled to face brown children that looked like her husband. This contributed to a rift between Black and white women, both competing for crumbs within patriarchy. Nonetheless, the tragic mulatto image evolved, allegedly because they were rejected by both Blacks and whites. Legally, these people are Black. As their fair skin was preferred by whites, it is plausible that resistance built from Blacks, yet ultimately whites enforced a fierce color code that rendered these people Black.

In India, many speculate that a similar set of politics evolved during the colonial era, though some believe that the color caste has existed here since the Aryans invaded and conquered/colonized the sub-continent.However, this theory has been rejected by many historians and scholars. Hindu Gods from the south with dark skin are often portrayed as blue/Black God and fair skinned in the North. "Fair and Handsome" is the country's most widely sold skin cream and promises fairer skin, increased popularity and job opportunities in weeks, just like its female counterparts "Fair and Lovely." Matrimonial pages in all India dailies are all ridden with 'fair' listed along caste and professional pedigree as qualities brought or sought by potential brides and grooms. And lastly, it's a rough life for a brown skin Black man in northern Indian!

When Bollywood star Shilpa Shetty appeared on UK reality TV show in 2007, Big Brother, the abuses heralded at the wealthy, fair skin princess was dubbed as racist, which sparked a short but mighty media feast in India on the topic. Arguments started by accusing Brits of racism, but quickly reflected upon homegrown racism, which many consider to be the ORIGINAL racism, but undisputedly the most extensive and extant. --Diepiriye 04:51, 3 April 2007 (UTC) -Diepiriye S. Kuku-Siemons, MPH [1][reply]

True. This is also comon in East Asia among Japanese and especially among Koreans. Dreammaker182 (talk) 02:17, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As a very pale redhead myself, does anyone else find it ironic that while in Japan, Korea and India women are using skin products to lighten their skin; white Americans and English women are obsessed with making theirs darker? Particularly here in the UK, the Oompa Loompa brigade are rife - each culture seems to want what it cannot have. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.145.252.66 (talk) 19:05, 22 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Missing Asia

I think there should be a section or paragraph that talks about colorism in Asia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Silverspark (talkcontribs) 15:32, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No mention of modern black colorism

Colorism is still very common in the black american community. It is considered standard for black men to choose light skinned women over dark skinned women. YVNP (talk) 06:48, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Changes regarding South Asia

A few changes were made in the Indian Subcontinent section, converting the section to encompass all of South Asia. Furthermore, certain misconstrued details were edited for accuracy, such as the depicted degree of colourism in South Asia. Colourism exists only in certain conservative or close-minded socio-religious circles, such as in film industries and marital advertisement, but is not as prevalent as it is made out to be. After all, South Asia is much more than just films and marriage. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 218.186.10.229 (talk) 16:23, 7 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Black Albino

Almost 90 percent of albinos living in the region were raised by single mothers, Mwaura said, because the fathers believed their wives were having affairs with white men.

"When I was born my father said his family tree doesn't have such children and left us," Mwaura said.

Some African communities believe that albinos are harbingers of disaster, while others mistakenly think albinos are mentally retarded and discourage their parents from taking them to school, saying it's a waste of money, he said.[2]


I think the case of Albino in Africa can be inserted under colorism. This will expand colorism to the part where it not only concerns ethnicity but also the color itself.

thank you

Msyaukat (talk) 06:26, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Skin color in relation to color

Can the color of skin which the subject of Colorism, be related to the color itslef?

I have an opinion that the imagery that uses black/dark in literature as something negative may lead to Colorism. I cannot manage to find a single article that can support my view.

If anyone of you have any say on this, you are most welcome to do so.

thank you

Msyaukat (talk) 06:31, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Du Bois

Is there any reason for the picture of W.E.B. Du Bois? There's no explanation and no mention of him in the article. As far as I can tell, it's there to give an example of a light-skinned black man, but without a reason given for the picture being there it's just a non-sequitur.--Teiladnam (talk) 11:53, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relationship to "black enough" controversy

During the runup 2008 Presidential Election, there was a controversy among some as to whether Obama was "black enough" [3]. This seems like it might be a form of colorism, albeit in the opposite direction (Obama, having light skin, was percieved as "not black enough"). Worth mentioning in the article? It got quite a bit of publicity when American voters were first getting to know Obama. Stonemason89 (talk) 20:11, 29 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Caucasian Americans

There is no information here about Colorism within the Caucasian American community. Rainbowofpeace (talk) 21:57, 8 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

MAURITANIA Also in African Republic of Mauritania Afro-Caucasians (whites, usually Arabic) are the elite while Afro-Blacks are the underclass.--83.35.180.172 (talk) 03:57, 23 December 2010 (UTC) In fact, like in other African countries and the Americas, a great part of Afro-Blacks were brought to Mauritania as slaves.--83.35.180.172 (talk) 03:57, 23 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Heightism (Sociology) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RM bot 05:45, 24 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Height discrimination which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RM bot 10:30, 16 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No mention of discrimination by white people?

Does anyone else find it odd that this article talks about discrimination based on skin colour by African Americans, Asians, Latin Americans, Arabs and Africans, but not by white Americans or Europeans? Seems to me we're missing something important there! If you came to this article without knowing anything about history, it would make you think that white people are the only group that don't discriminate based on skin colour. I bet I can guess what the majority ethnicity of Wikipedia is... Robofish (talk) 16:43, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

need to scrap all content and start whole article anew

Can please who is in charge just please erase this whole article and strat with a NEW text altogether from the beginning ? It is OK to keep th etitle, but then in the first paragraph one has to CLARIFY that this type of discrimination has VARIOUS ASPECTS, and in which aspects is it different from Racism. ONE MUST CLEARLY DEFINE the WORDS one is using before moving in with the "who said what and when and why", etc. PLEASE THIS IS A VERY SENSITIVE ISSUE, A VERY IMPORTANT SUBJECT, so please wikipedia contributors, I KNOW you can do better than that.