Pondering Racial Connotations of "Lightful"

Status
Not open for further replies.

Hawkeye

Well-known member
Quote:
Originally Posted by Raerae
I find this picture offensive. Not only does it promote the use of illegal narcotics, it's also promoting the abuse of animals.


regardless, I want whatever he's having and I don't want to do it alone so I guess the cat will have to join me- or Captain Kirk. One of the Two
greengrin.gif
lmao.gif
clap.gif
 

kimmy

Well-known member
i know this has been mentioned, but to reiterate: skin lightening ingredients are there to reduce the appearance of redness (such as acne scars, etc.) NOT to actually make your skin more pale.

that being said, however, i do still have to ponder something. let me go back to the original topic. i always have wondered why it's okay to embrace darker skintones, but it seems that if there's any kind of small reference to embracing pale skintones, suddenly there's an upheaval, and these cosmetic companies must be sending us the message that white is supreme. why can't it ever just be that these companies are trying to support us in our quest to embrace our own beauty? or...can we not be beautiful because we lack pigmentation?

it's okay for cosmetic companies to come out with complete lines of makeup catering to darker skin tones. hell...there's makeup brands that cater specifically to darker skintones. but the minute someone sees anything tht might suggest a product is intended for use by the company's paler customers, they must be stopped because that's racist. it isn't racist. lighter skintones just as darker skintones have specific cosmetic needs. that's just how it is. i'm pissed that mac doesn't make a foundation light enough for me...but does that mean that they're trying to tell me i'm TOO white? no, not at all.

i'm not trying to sound rude, but this whole thing is getting tiring. like shimmer said, not everything is a race issue...and not everything should be made into one.
 

GalleyGirl

Well-known member
Quote:
Originally Posted by kimmy

it's okay for cosmetic companies to come out with complete lines of makeup catering to darker skin tones. hell...there's makeup brands that cater specifically to darker skintones. but the minute someone sees anything tht might suggest a product is intended for use by the company's paler customers, they must be stopped because that's racist. it isn't racist. lighter skintones just as darker skintones have specific cosmetic needs. that's just how it is. i'm pissed that mac doesn't make a foundation light enough for me...but does that mean that they're trying to tell me i'm TOO white? no, not at all.


Thanks for mentioning this. I actually have a friend, someone I was formerly quite close to, that I stopped talking to partially because she thought it fine to denigrate pale-toned people. She was constantly telling me I needed a tan, talking about her other friends, saying that they might stand a chance of being pretty only if they lost that "pale moon glow." Back in high school I thought this was okay because that was the height of 90's PC-ism, and there was a double standard when it came to racism (and clearly based on this thread, many think there still is). One day I just got sick of it and realized its not okay to tell someone they are too light and need a tan just as much as its not okay to tell someone they are too dark and need to bleach.
 

Beauty Mark

Well-known member
I think it's important to bear in mind the idea of paleness as not only a beauty standard but also as a way of "passing." We aren't too far from the times when, in order to get ahead, some biracial people would try to pass themselves off as white. Pale skin has been revered for a long time (it used to be a sign of wealth, since you could pay people to take care of your land and not have to go out in the sun) and in some cultures, still is. Some very traditional East Asian families get on the case of a darker member; this is the case of my friend, who doesn't tan or anything. She was just born naturally darker. With the exception of the tanning crazy, which to me has only health connotations and not race, I haven't seen really anyone trying to be a darker shade because of race.

That's the biggest difference to me when it comes to how one treats paleness to darker skin tones. It's terrible that people are assholes towards you for being pale, but there's a lot of historical difference IMO when it comes to not being pale that makes the comparison weak.
 

GalleyGirl

Well-known member
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beauty Mark
That's the biggest difference to me when it comes to how one treats paleness to darker skin tones. It's terrible that people are assholes towards you for being pale, but there's a lot of historical difference IMO when it comes to not being pale that makes the comparison weak.

Doesn't make it hurt any less though when someone says it,and it doesn't make my feelings any less valid. To me its all the same.
 

Raerae

Well-known member
That double standard exists everywhere you look... For whatever reason it's seen as OK to be cruel to someone, as long as they represent a percieved ideal, or majority. Since there is this false idea that minority groups can't have the power to hurt majority ones, so whatever they say, can't be mean. Yet the moment someone of a majority, or ideal mentions a negative about a minority, or non ideal, call the PC police. Likewise if your part of a minority, is OK to use inflamatory statements about your minority. But all hell breaks loose if a majority uses it, even if it's a true statement. It's pretty lame when you think about it.

You want to know why as a fair skinned individual, hearing about darker skin MUp problems seems like a dead horse and it seems like i dont care? A huge part of it comes from the fact that my personal issues are trivialized constantly by minority groups. It's all over this thread, that because i'm white, my problems aren't as big as those who have a darker complextion, because the "majority" of products on the market are for fair skinned people. Even though, as a part of the percieved majority, I can't use many of the products availible, because they are too dark.

It's obviously racially motivated that they dont make a foundation in NW Casper the Friendly Ghost, right? Oh wait... I'm white, so it's not racist, I should just go get a tan (I've been told this by MA's as a solution to my lack of selection). Just imagine the uproar that would happen if a MA told a dark skinned women who was having problems finding a matching shade that she should, "get a bleach." If I got upset over being told to "get a tan" the person I complained too would prolly laugh at me, and say that they agreed with the MA.
 

Raerae

Well-known member
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beauty Mark
It's terrible that people are assholes towards you for being pale, but there's a lot of historical difference IMO when it comes to not being pale that makes the comparison weak.

Yeh but you know what, the past isn't my problem. I'm sick of being held responsible for the sins of my fathers. You want me to have empathy towards your plight, then have some empathy towards mine. Instead of saying, "Oh well my issues are still bigger."
 

Beauty Mark

Well-known member
I'm not saying my issues are bigger; I'm talking a larger scale of things. On the individual, hurtful things are hurtful, no matter why they're said or who says them.
 

Raerae

Well-known member
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beauty Mark
I'm not saying my issues are bigger; I'm talking a larger scale of things. On the individual, hurtful things are hurtful, no matter why they're said or who says them.

Large scale problems start at the individual level. If you want to change the ideas and opinions of a majority, start with an indivdual. You don't always have to make sure to 1 up me on the drama meter.
 

Shimmer

Well-known member
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beauty Mark
I'm not saying my issues are bigger; I'm talking a larger scale of things. On the individual, hurtful things are hurtful, no matter why they're said or who says them.

I completely understand what you're saying but like Raerae said (what fucking kind of warped universe are we in that she and I are so vocally agreeing with each other???????
winks.gif
) being held accountable for the sins of the father sucks.

Particularly perturbing to me is that Specktra was created for all who wear makeup to use. Everyone. Man. Woman. Young woman. Young man. Cat. Whatever. It was created with a blind eye to race and creed. Every member is encouraged to post, every member is encouraged to participate, no harsh criticism is allowed, and the site on the whole is probably hands down THE most openly welcoming site on the internet across all racial, geographical, and gender lines...
Yet...
That wasn't good enough.
There was self-segregation in that a special forum had to be created for WoC. The self-segregation is what bothers me.
 

Hawkeye

Well-known member
It is bothering but at the same time you almost wonder if those that do self segregate WANT it that way. I know this sounds horrible but it does seem that and it's not with this forum its with every forum that there must be a form of self segregation. You can have the most benign place in the world and say you are 100% equal, we don't look a like but you have all the respect etc that everyone else gets.... and yet there will be self segregation.

and I'm really about to rock the boat here- it's almost like they don't want equality, acceptance etc. They scream that they do but if those who self impose segregation actually did- they wouldn't scream everything is racism based (whites and blacks here), they wouldn't form self segregation, and they wouldn't want the seperateness. Or if they DO want it they don't know how to handle it.

If it wasn't wanted it wouldn't be there but I do believe it is wanted.
 

Shimmer

Well-known member
But if there is self-segregation, isn't it hypocritical to call racism? To choose to exclude oneself from the majority is a conscious decision, isn't it?
 

Hawkeye

Well-known member
Yes. But they will still scream racism. Because they still think that it's all about them. I mean we have had many instances with many members who were throughly convinced everything was about them. Religion, race, politics. It was all about them. Regardless of what anyone else said.

And is it hypocritical. Yes. It is. But it will happen anyway.
 

Shimmer

Well-known member
That's not acceptable.
Saying "That's how things are" is why slavery happened for so long, that's why female children in China are thrown away, that's why the sex/prostitution trade is continuing.
That's how things are but that's not how they should BE.
 

Hawkeye

Well-known member
very true.
But who is going to compromise?
The Self imposed segregationist won't. After all they want it to be the same.
Slavery changed after the segregationist changed their minds and slavery was repealed. But then you still had the segregationist- but that changed after the segregationist changed their minds.
But we can't change their minds. They have to. and if they want to self impose segregation the only thing we can do is let them and encourage them to join in every now and then and maybe then it can change.
 

GalleyGirl

Well-known member
Quote:
Originally Posted by Raerae
Yeh but you know what, the past isn't my problem. I'm sick of being held responsible for the sins of my fathers. You want me to have empathy towards your plight, then have some empathy towards mine. Instead of saying, "Oh well my issues are still bigger."

When you think of it, how many of these people were actually our forefathers? People assume that because you are white, you have some eternally long line of privilege starting from the beginning of man. In the beginning and middle of the 20th century, certain European ethnicities were not considered part of the white majority in this country. The Irish, the Italians and the Portugese are just some of the few that come to mind. "No work for Irish" signs were very prevelant back in the day, and it was perfectly acceptable.

Now I am not saying it was as difficult for them to become accepted into the mainstream and overcome prejudice as others who came into this country. Clearly, their European heritage and visage did help. But the issue of whiteness is way the heck more complicated than most people are willing to admit.
 

Shimmer

Well-known member
Quote:
Originally Posted by GalleyGirl
When you think of it, how many of these people were actually our forefathers? People assume that because you are white, you have some eternally long line of privilege starting from the beginning of man. In the beginning and middle of the 20th century, certain European ethnicities were not considered part of the white majority in this country. The Irish, the Italians and the Portugese are just some of the few that come to mind. "No work for Irish" signs were very prevelant back in the day, and it was perfectly acceptable.

Now I am not saying it was as difficult for them to become accepted into the mainstream and overcome prejudice as others who came into this country. Clearly, their European heritage and visage did help. But the issue of whiteness is way the heck more complicated than most people are willing to admit.


*raises hand*
Irish and Cherokee here.
You're right, there was oppression on those fronts as well...and the American Indian nations still to this day face negative attitudes and poverty like no one should ever face in the USA.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top