In a Huffington Post article Kim Lute talks about the pain she feels because she is unable to befriend other black women as a light-skinned black woman. In one of her few frank moments she says:
"In all fairness, this "mulatto" (which technically I am not) has led a far easier life simply because I lack darkness. "
- - - - - - - -
Light-skinned women are going to have to get just this honest to have a real conversation. But unlike the writer of this article, they are going to have to spend just as much time on how they have the "easier [black] life" as they do on the jealousy they experience from darker-skinned females.
However, I'm not sure honest conversation was Lute's objective. I think maybe venting pain was...if I'm feeling generous.
Regardless of what I think of Lute or her click-baity article, I totally get that light-skinned women get the outsider treatment, the jealousy treatment, and being treated as less than black from darker-skinned females. I haven't experience it, but I've seen it. I've seen it happen to people I care about and love. And it hurt me, so I know it hurt them
 |
| photo by Jenn Deering Davis |
Overall, though, it seems like being light-skinned preference is virtually no benefit at all when you're a young kid. I also tend to think the scars left on the light-skinned are there for life. And those childhood scars lead them to be quick with the black and brown version of the predominantly white "I'm colorblind!" defense. How many times have I heard "I don't see shade differences" or "We're all black!" The light fragility sufferer is every bit as shrill as the white person who whispers, practically to themselves, "There's only one race, the human race" over and over again.
It's kinda...well...crazy. How can a light skinned person look at a white person and know that that person is experiencing white fragility then turn around and exhibit the same symptoms seconds later when the subject of colorism comes up?
But let me be clear. Crazy as light fragility seems to me, these dark jealousies and light preferences aren't coming from defectiveness or magic.
The white beauty standard has been beating black and brown women over the head since we first set foot here in 17th century. And while black men may have been able to shrug off the light-house-negro and dark-field-hand identity, women are still judged by beauty and looks - not abilities. Even a presidential candidate like Hillary Clinton was judged by hair and her tendency to wear pantsuits.
I'm prissy, but I'm a feminist. I need my make-up, my hair-did, and my heels. And I love clothes. But all these things are icing, not the cake. The best part of me is my empathy and my brain which are connected to my abilities. And it's a fight to keep the beauty thing in its proper place--even for me.
A woman's worth has repeatedly been linked to beauty **ALWAYS** And for black women in the U.S. that means from the 17th century to now that we've been clobbered with the white beauty standard over and over and over. And while many of today's black women seem like they ARE aware that the white media beats into us the idea that white women are gorgeous ones at the top of the ladder - in stores, in magazines, in movies, and in huge all white ensemble casts like "Once Upon A Time" -- it seems like most black women think that they are "smart enough" to be immune. But we're not. We need more reinforcement and support than we're getting. We just do.
But back to the ladder...
If white women are at the top of the ladder or above the ladder, then light women are a rung or two above dark-skinned women. And light women with white features? They are 7 or 8 rungs above us all (dark-skinned, medium-skinned, light-skinned-with-black-features). From what I have observed? Light-women without white features may have fairly limited privilege (maybe intra-racial privilege only). But I don't know for sure. Light women ain't talkin'. And on the rare occasion they do talk, they sure aren't talking about privilege differences between different flavors of light women when the subject of colorism rears its ugly head.
Actually, neither dark-skinned or light-skinned women want to talk about who echoes white beauty supremacy through our ranks.
Collectively, black men may have left the resentments of the light-skinned, house-negro, massa-secret-son identity behind. And maybe that's because light-skinned black men readily admit privilege (or so I've heard). And maybe that's because they aren't as afraid of their privilege as light women are because light-skinned-beauty isn't as big a part of who they are. Men are judged by what they do in this society. Light-skinned and dark-skinned men are not being told their worth is based on (their closeness to white) beauty constantly. However, black men from Booker T Washington to many or most male Civil Rights Heroes to Bill Cosby (and half (?)of the rich and famous black men) thoroughly believe in the white female beauty standard - if their choice of spouse/girlfriends can be believed.
Forget the rich and black male famous, though.
How many dark-skinned girls have come home from high school crying over having been ignored? That movie "School Daze" by Spike Lee is and was real as far as college goes--even at the predominantly white colleges. But some black girls that look black don't cry. Most don't, in fact. Strong black women don't cry. They simply get determined to do what they need to do -- get that hair relaxed, get that first long straight weave.
Dark girls are even treated less favorably by parents. Light girls in the same family as a dark girl can bask in the sun of their parents favor or suffer in the hatred of their siblings or both. Oprah Winfrey was the dark girl in her family as I recall (mother and sister lighter?) I think I sort of deduced her sister was a bask-er? Maybe? Either way, that family experience probably left a significant mark on O. Her path to success and failure might be evidence despite the money. But that's another discussion.
Still, the thing I wonder about the most about these non-conversations about colorism between black women is this:
20 YEAR CAREER LEFT & COSBYs RIGHT
Why do the Kim Lute's of the world open their mouths about being light-skinned at all if they are not going to talk about how white people (male and female) fawn over their tanned-white-person looks in the workplace?
Why not talk about how bad they feel for the dark skinned sister they like to hang with when black men come tripping over themselves to get to them once they hit their teen years --especially if they have white-looks in addition to light-skin?
Why not talk about the source of the light-skinned benefits as being co-located with the source of the dark-skinned jealousy? Because feminist or not, I know that the one thing that heterosexual women get heated and competitive about is men.
Speaking of my less than well-formed feminism, I resented the sexist tone of the Huff Post article.
The author of the original article describes women in this stereotypical way, using words that imply petty, back biting etc. Maybe that can't be avoided if you're talking about jealousy of dark-skinned women. Maybe. But I also tend to feel the Huff Post piece went off the rails into territory mostly unknown by light-skinned black women when the author said she mostly makes friends with white women because the jealousy of dark-skinned women is so thick. This is something I've never heard from a light-skinned woman. Then again, why would somebody who felt that way tell someone who looks like me?
The title of the piece "The Problem With Black Women") didn't do a thing for me either. It seems to me it deliberately made black women sound defective. Title can probably be said to be click bait-y and click-bate-y
So how about diving into the real description of real negative black female interactions instead of rehashing the dumb stereotypes applied to all women? Why not talk about the avoidance and wrinkled noses like something stinks every time the subject of colorism comes up between light and dark women. There isn't any yelling and screaming. There's silence and walking away....and festering wounds.
And by the way? Black women of all shades get to say "OUCH!" That's why I am not ashamed of the colorism conversation AT ALL. It's a white supremacy wound. And we get to get messy while we work it out
Light-skinned women get to say their "OUCH" when they are left out, ostracized, and assumed to have a superior attitude. Medium and dark-skinned women also get to say their version of "OUCH" when their beauty is erased by media, mothers, and would be beaus.
However, some or most light skinned women,
especially the white featured,do not get to say "OUCH"
without
doing the same due diligence
in making the same earnest search
for unseen, unheard, and un-felt privilege
as some anti-racist white people to do
then telling the truth about that privilege
And if some reading this blog are thinking "OMG we're all black!" right now, then think about how similar that sounds to the "stop playing the race card" or "I'm colorblind!" uttered by so many white people when they are made uncomfortable by conversations on race.
All of us have areas of privilege and oppression. My sources of oppression are my femaleness, my race, and my skin color. I feel, see, and hear these weekly if not daily. I am also middle class and Christian. These are my sources of privilege. My privileges feel like so much nothing to me most of the time. They are as imperceptible, normal, and unnoticeable as the air I breathe -- until or unless they are gone.
My oppressions don't excuse me from having to look for my privileges...just like being poor doesn't excuse the white person from looking at how they benefit from white privilege. And being black and suffering real racism doesn't excuse the light-skinned person from seeking out their light privilege either.
So light-skinned girls have the heavy lifting to do, in my opinion -- as far as healing our race of colorism. They have to get out and hunt down their unfelt, unseen, unheard privilege. Dark-skinned girls have it easy in comparison. Our oppression is easy to see, at least as easy to see as the jealousy. But it might be harder to look at the real reasons for our collective addiction to long, straight, extensions and the creamy crack.
We have to be able to admit our weaknesses in order to work on healing them. When we are stronger for having done the work and suffered the discomfort, those who run or side step their unconscious participation in colorism will seem pitiful to us --even if we find ourselves looking a mess while we figure ourselves out.
I've been reading a biography about a black woman born more than 100 years ago. I can't believe how much hasn't changed. The silence has been deafening in the name of solidarity since before and after the paper bag test. Colorism is a thing we have to deal with more honestly than we have been. Pretending all is peaceful and well, pretending like you don't see color isn't going e-race colorism for black people any faster than white people pretending they don't see race is going to e-race racism.
LINK TO HUFFINGTON POST'S "THE PROBLEM WITH BLACK WOMEN" by Kim Lute
PSSSSSST! (Whispering: Other non-white women have the same problems. Asian women have tape to make their eyes look rounder or have surgery like talk show host Julie Chen. Asian women that make the cut for TV and movies are "white-er" http://nypost.com/2013/09/12/julie-chen-had-plastic-surgery-to-fix-asian-eyes/
*I've been extremely fortunate in my choice of friends. Light-skinned women I've hung with were AWARE and did not let colorism play out at my expense in school or at the club, ever.
I wish there were more rungs on the ladder. Halle's supposed networth is 70 million. Phylicia and Raven's are supposedly 55 Million.Viola's is 3 million. Most of dark skinned women at the bottom don't belong on the ladder at all. The Gugu Mbatha Raw and Lupita Nyongo are relative newcomers in yellow. Photos in red were the outliers. Angela Bassett was high on the ladder despite being relatively dark skinned
No comments:
Post a Comment