Dialogue on Colorism - Part 1
Taken verbatim from: Africa Speaks Reasoning Forum
Ayinde
on: Sep 13th, 2004, 1:36pm
Colorism
Colorism is a form of black-on-black racism, based on skin-tone, exemplified in terms such as "high yellow" (sometimes written and/or pronounced as "high yaller") as well as the "brown paper bag test". There seems to be an implicit calculus behind this belief that makes the goodness of the individual inversely related to the darkness of his/her skin.
The brown paper bag test was a ritual once practiced by certain African-American sororities and fraternities who discriminated against people who were "too black". That is, these groups would not let anyone into the sorority or fraternity whose skin tone was darker than a paper bag. Spike Lee's film School Daze satirizes this practice.
The paper bag test
By BILL MAXWELL, Times Staff Writer
Published: August 31, 2003
Each year, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission receives about 85,000 discrimination cases, a phenomenon to be expected in a society that touts itself as a "melting pot."
Many of these cases involve the complaints of minority groups against majority groups. We rarely expect a member of a minority group to discriminate against someone else in the same group. But that is exactly what happens among African-Americans.
More than any other minority group in the United States, blacks discriminate against one another. The discrimination, called "colorism," is based on skin tone: whether a person is dark-skinned or light-skinned or in the broad middle somewhere.
Full Article : www.sptimes.com
|
Oshun_Auset
Sep 13th, 2004, 4:55pm
There was also something reffered to as the the Blue Vein Society; to join, a person had to be light enough that their veins were visible at the wrist. I also read of a church who would hang a fine toothed comb(meant for European/Whites) over the doorway by a string. If you couldn't pass it easily through your hair, you couldn't enter. Churches used the paper-bag test as well; into the early 20th century there were Black churches that painted their doors brown, and worshippers had to have skin color lighter than the door to be invited to join the congregation. The books Color Complex and Skin/Deep go into great detail about these things.
The form may have changed but the essence remains the same. Colorism is netrenched in this global capitalist apologist, white supremacist society. The only thing that will change it is organization of the masses of oppressed and exploited peoples and individual action counteracting it.
Discrimination from whites and other groups remains a big problem for blacks. But colorism is just as serious, if not more so. Colorism saps our strength from the inside. It weakens our power and ability to fight the outside forces that keep us marginalized in larger society.
Very well put.
|
Ayinde
Sep 13th, 2004, 6:47pm
"The form may have changed but the essence remains the same. Colorism is netrenched in this global capitalist apologist, white supremacist society. The only thing that will change it is organization of the masses of oppressed and exploited peoples and individual action counteracting it."
This really says nothing to me, and it is the same line I have seen quickly repeated on this board before you came here. Colorism is also entrenched in people of all colors and nationalities today.
Think of Whites telling Blacks that "racism is rooted in this global capitalist apologist, white supremacist society. The only thing that will change it is organization of the masses of oppressed and exploited peoples and individual action counteracting it."
Well coming from a white person I would just leave them to babble, as it really says 'nothing'. It is slightly different but not too far off for me to say I feel the same about all other light-skinned people 'telling' dark-skinned Blacks to organize. It is not like I have some dislike for them, or White people, but I would expect them to respect the right of the people most affected by the system to advocate the solution.
Usually before this issue is properly reasoned out, there is a rush to 'solution', and calls to organize. Even the discussions on Racism, Gender discrimination and Colorism are not solutions. These discussions are supposed to lead people to an understanding of how to ensure that those who are most receptive to, and affected by, these social ills get to directly benefit from the moves to resolve it.
As I have said earlier, any attempt to come together (organize) with this issue out there, means that dark-skinned Blacks are expected to support light-skinned ones to get ahead based on the same unfair privileges. Any mobilization that is not taking all of this into account is bound to repeat the same errors.
There is no way White people can prove with words that they no longer hold racist assumptions. There is no way anyone can prove with words that they are above Colorism and gender discrimination. But there is a way to operate that ensures that people who receive unfair privileges in the system are not used as symbols for change, and are not the first to get recognition or material benefits from attempts to change the system.
There is a lot more to discuss about Colorism before I share some of my views on how people can operate to ensure that those who are privileged in this corrupt system do not block others from progressing.
|
Oshun_Auset
Sep 15th, 2004, 11:51am
The comment was directly taken from The AAPRP(All African People's Revolutionary Party) ideological training guidelines, not my personal beliefs...Hence it was coming from the ideology of Kwame Nkrumah, Sekou Ture, Marcus Garvey, and the masses of African people on the continent and in the diaspora and their struggle, as well as other Pan-Africansits who developed this ideology who are not 'light skinned'. I am repeating these words from my ideological training in this organization....not from my own personal ideas that I came up with.
I am not "telling" my darker brothers and sisters anything...in fact this information was taught to me throught the struggles of the masses of my darker brothers and sisters...I just happen to be in agreement with it. So if you have an ideological argument with it or disagree with it, you do not aggree with the personalities that came up with it as a solution at the 5th Pan-African congress, not me. It therfeore seems that your attack on this ideological statement is unfounded because you are responding to who you wrongly percieved came up with this ideology and statement. It is Nkrumahism-Turaism. Not Oshun-Ausetism.
Knowing who the authors of this statement are, has your opinion of the statement now changed? Or does the ideology formed at the 5th Pan-African Congress, largely authored by Kwame Nkrumah and Sekou Ture, as well as promoted by Kwame Ture still "mean nothing to you"? If you disagree with it in general that is one thing. But from what you have stated it seems you were criticizing it because you thought it originated from a light skinned person trying to tell other dark skined people what to do...Which is not the case. This solution originated from "the people most affected by the system". So therefore, I am respecting these people by taking on this ideology.
|
Ayinde
Sep 15th, 2004, 12:16pm
The comment was directly taken from The AAPRP(All African People's Revolutionary Party) ideological training guidelines, not my personal beliefs...
Well if the statement was directly taken from others, it would have been good to put their names to it (credit them). Here the real authors were overshadowed again.
My opinion is the same, especially in the context of exploring Colorism with mixed-race light-skinned people. Prematurely using those statements before an issue is properly aired can be viewed as an attempt to discourage proper examination of the issue.
I am not supposed to accept what they say in the context others use it. I am also saying that whatever they explored then, we now have to take into consideration other factors like Colorism. I am sure I know the meaning of what they said, and not just the words. In that regard, I am cool expressing for myself how I feel and think on any matter.
|
Oshun_Auset
Sep 15th, 2004, 12:48pm
Oshun_Auset
"Well if the statement was directly taken from others, it would have been good to put their names to it (credit them). Here the real authors were overshadowed again."
Not so, considering I always post information from this organization(with it noted), espouse this ideology, and have repeatedly stated I am a member. The statement was not plagerized...because I put it in my own words....It is also the ideology of others which is now mine and whoever else is in the AAPRP. Almost all of my political ideology comes from this organization. that is why I have promoted it on this site(and any other site I visit) so much.
"My opinion is the same, especially in the context of exploring Colorism with mixed-race light-skinned people. Prematurely using those statements before an issue is properly aired can be viewed as an attempt to discourage proper examination of the issue."
It is habbit for anyone from the AAPRP to try to end a statement on a possitive note with some referrance to the organizations ideological standpoint. It is something that has been ingrained in the members for years. It is not an attempt to discourage any discussion. But rather something we have been ideologically trained to do. In my conversations with brothers and sisters from other chapters in the states and when in Africa, I noticed we all do this. We actually often all finish each others end statements in unisen when discussing particluar subjects since we have been trained under the same ideology, with the same information.
"I am not supposed to accept what they say in the context others use it. I am also saying that whatever they explored then, we now have to take into consideration other factors like Colorism. I am sure I know the meaning of what they said, and not just the words. In that regard, I am cool expressing for myself how I feel and think on any matter."
Since I know the meaning of what they said and not just the words also. I will also continue to express what I feel and think. Colorism was explored at the 5th Pan-African conference and by the people mentioned at great length...as it should have been and should continue to be. Hopefully, this continued exploration will take place on this thread.
|
Ayinde
Sep 15th, 2004, 3:22pm
"The comment was directly taken from The AAPRP(All African People's Revolutionary Party) ideological training guidelines, not my personal beliefs... "
I do know the meaning of the words I highlighted.
People are always free to promote what they understand, and should express themselves, even if others disagree.
I personally believe that many White and light-skinned ones do not get Black issues for several factors (I will develop this later on). They are often too eager to show that because they can use the words that they are supposed to be different.
We had a recent example of this on the other board, of a White one, who was well armed with all the words and images of Haile Selassie, but obviously he had been interpreting these things quite differently from 'informed Blacks'. He was quick to produce Selassie's quotes, and at the end of the day he was still ignorant about their appropriate use.
This kind of thing is quite common in Black Movements, as words are the easiest thing to get. Many Whites/Light-skinned ones are much more comfortable with words. Recently, I saw on the TV this 3 to 4 year old white child repeating word-for-word one of Martin Luther King's speeches. I am sure she has more of the words than many Blacks. But being armed with those words does not mean she understands anything.
The proof that many light-skinned and White ones do not get it, is very obvious in their efforts to show they are the exception to the general White and light-skinned conduct. If they really got it, they would know that they couldn't prove that they are different with words. It is the same way that no number of words can prove that I am above gender biases. I may genuinely believe I am different, but words cannot prove it.
If someone says that dark-skinned Blacks do not care about Africa, then that is a generalization that also applies to I. I do not feel any desire to argue about that. I do not feel a need to show that I am an exception.
Anyhow, I will share more on this Colorism thing.
Light-skinned Blacks come to these Black movements with a double 'advantage'. They feel they are more deserving than Whites because they can claim to be Black, while at the same time they benefit from the unaddressed Colorism to get added leverage over dark-skinned Blacks.
They usually want everything tailored to appease them, and quite often they get their way. They are usually chosen to lead in many quarters, because even the Blacks who pick them are aware that the media plays the color game, and they may never get the exposure to express themselves.
In that regard, light-skinned Blacks are usually the most defensive and aggressive when challenged. Armed with revolutionary words, and a color 'advantage', they are quick to point out the White problem, and play down their own role in the White system. But for some of us it is not difficult to accept personal responsibility for our poor evaluations and choices, while at the same time showing all the layers of the oppression.
This is not a discussion for this one thread. But it is a discussion that should always go along with discussions on White supremacy and White Privileges.
White Supremacy may be the bigger cause, but Colorism robs Blacks of advancing meaning to words. It robs dark-skinned Blacks of the exposure they rightly deserve. It keeps dark-skinned Blacks unwilling to learn to clearly articulate their own feelings. Many give up because they feel the light-skinned ones will always get the breaks. Ultimately it denies self-determination to the worst victims- the dark-skinned kinky-hair Blacks.
|
Oshun_Auset
Sep 15th, 2004, 6:11pm
"The proof that many light-skinned and White ones do not get it, is very obvious in their efforts to show they are the exception to the general White and light-skinned conduct. If they really got it, they would know that they couldn't prove that they are different with words. It is the same way that no number of words can prove that I am above gender biases. I may genuinely believe I am different, but words cannot prove it."
Unfortunately words are all that can be used over the internet. Actions speak louder, but only can be seen when dealing with people in "the real world" not cyberspace.
"If someone says that dark-skinned Blacks do not care about Africa, then that is a generalization that also applies to I. I do not feel any desire to argue about that. I do not feel a need to show that I am an exception."
I personally would feel compelled to argue against it, even though I am not dark skinned, because it is simply not true. The majority of dark skinned African/Blacks are on the continent. So how could they not care about their home?
"Anyhow, I will share more on this Colorism thing.
Light-skinned Blacks come to these Black movements with a double 'advantage'. They feel they are more deserving than Whites because they can claim to be Black, while at the same time they benefit from the unaddressed Colorism to get added leverage over dark-skinned Blacks."
"More deserving" or "also oppressed"(although obviousely not to the same level) because they are also of African heritage?(not to be confused with exploitation which everyone experiences outside of an elite few) Is this not also a factor in light skinned Blacks/Africans coming to African liberation movements?
"They usually want everything tailored to appease them, and quite often they get their way. They are usually chosen to lead in many quarters, because even the Blacks who pick them are aware that the media plays the color game, and they may never get the exposure to express themselves."
Now as far as certain leaders getting picked because they are lighter...by lights and darks alike because of the medias role in the color game, that has and does happen, especially in integrationalist activist movements(NAACP, civil rights activism/Rosa Parks for example) In Pan-Africanism...I don't know any examples of this. A Light skinned person approaching this movement with that attitude would get called out immediately and laughed out of a meeting.
"White Supremacy may be the bigger cause, but Colorism robs Blacks of advancing meaning to words. It robs dark-skinned Blacks of the exposure they rightly deserve. It keeps dark-skinned Blacks unwilling to learn to clearly articulate their own feelings. Many give up because they feel the light-skinned ones will always get the breaks. Ultimately it denies self-determination to the worst victims- the dark-skinned kinky-hair Blacks."
This is very true and well said, much like what was hilighted in my first post.
In your opinion(and anyone else who would like to chime in) What should dark skinned people do to combat and distroy colorism they experience?.... also, what should light skinned people do, that are aware of the advantage they have, and see it as unfair, and try in every way possible not to take advantage of the advantaged possition colorism puts them in, as well as fight(personally and systematically via organization) against every instance they possibly see of their darker brothers and sisters being put into the background...not shying away from discussions about it, and constantly taking the background possition when available so that their dark skinned brethren can be in the forfront? (even though that is impossible to always accomplish because of the nature of colorism)
I am aware that even asking the question (What should light skinned people do?) may be construed as an attempt to take the focus off of the darker masses, but I am really curious as to your personal advice on this(and anyone elses). I wish others would give their opinion and/or experiences connecting with the origional article and post any other information about this subject they deam important because it needs to be examined and discussed.
|
|
