On Colorism.

Eugene Robinson muses on the “light-skinned” part of Harry Reid’s remark, writing: “Color bias has always existed in this country. We don’t talk about it because we think of color as subordinate to racial identification.”

Robinson argues that the one-drop rule has, overall, been good for black interests — because it forced a unified black identity which, in turn, led to a group fight against oppression. But the one-drop rule didn’t prevent a higher value being placed on lighter skinned blacks:

American society’s focus on race instead of color explains why what Harry Reid said was so rude. But I don’t think it can be a coincidence that so many pioneers — Edward Brooke, the first black senator since Reconstruction; Thurgood Marshall, the first black Supreme Court justice; Colin Powell, the first black secretary of state — have been lighter-skinned. Reid’s analysis was probably good sociology, even if it was bad politics.

Reid’s comments picked up on something most black folks don’t talk about outside of their own circles: skin tone matters. And I’m glad Robinson took the time to write a piece on color bias, since most of the focus on Reid’s statement has been about the unfortunate (but not actually racist) use of the word “Negro.”

A conversation on colorism is desperately needed. Even though skin lightening ads are mostly a thing of the past here in the U.S., it’s no mistake that so many black folks on the national stage (who aren’t athletes or comedians, that is) are fairer skinned. And, as Robinson noted, light-skinned black women with wavy, curly hair dominate advertisements that call for negroes. Plus, Ta-Nehisi remarked yesterday that being criticized for being “color struck” (fancying light skinned blacks) can lead to an guilt-induced bias toward darker skinned blacks. But narrowing in on a particular shade, not a person, is dehumanizing in the worst way.

Luckily for us all, Rush Limbaugh, de facto political strategist, sees a chance in the Haitian earthquake crisis for Obama to overcome colorism here in the States:

Latest posts by Shani (see all)

  • I don’t know if another “conversation about colorism” even will be…significant. Typically, colorism talks seem stuck at the stage of confirmation.

    I’d be more interested if there were/are articles/discussions about the next stage.

    Can you consciously get over colorism and how so? These are the types of talks I want to see.

  • Ash

    Good point. I agree that this issue deserves more attention. I must add that skin-lightening ads are not a thing of the past. It is on the rise in the Caribbean. Also colorism is not just an issue in the black community. It is prevalent amongst Asians and Latinos as well.

    • shani-o

      I didn’t say the ads were completely a thing of the past. I said they’re MOSTLY a thing of the past in the U.S., and then I linked to a piece that I wrote this week which includes a recent ad for skin lightening in India.

  • Val

    A perfect example of the colorism that still exists is the casting of the film Precious. The troubled and deviant people in the film are dark skinned and the good and helpful people are light skinned and or bi-racial. I read the book years ago and I don’t remember that in the book.

    • That bugged me so much about the movie. In the book, Ms. Rain is dark skinned with locs. The whole point of the Ms. Rain character was to show Precious that she didn’t have to be light-skinned or white to be beautiful or worthy. No shade to Paula Patton; I think she’s a good actress. But that was a poor casting choice because it undermined a key turning point in Precious’ thinking in the novel.

  • Ash

    Ah ok, I see. Again, thanks for bringing up this issue. It also seems like in certain cases, dark skinned men are more acceptable than dark skinned women. I don’t know, I guess there are so many angles to the issue.