Directed by Menace to Society’s Bill Duke, Oprah’s OWN is bringing about a very interesting subject (among the African American race / “blacks”) that’s rarely talked about. COLORISM
Whereas the typical argument that HAD often gotten the low end theory and explanation of the being the victim of the colorism had always been the darker skins within the race; this time around, Oprah is giving [the less often seen as victims] the floor to speak:
The lighter skins within the race.
Surprisingly however, although each touch various stereotypical matters of being accused of having entitlement issues (often thought to be “automatic” with the lighter skinned race), another poignant, atypical, and unusual subject is being discussed on OWN:
The fact that now[adays]-things are quietly changing such that the darker skinned of the race has (somewhat) gotten some breathing room [from the tight, unforgiving, and often cruel grip of inter-race racism]. On the flip side of that, now[adays], things are going totally into reverse for the lighter skinned person within the race:
The pressures to tan and be darker than their light skin is now upon them…in order to feel accepted as “pretty”—[nowadays] (as quoted by Raven Symone).
I, for one, can vouch for having noticed that in Hollywood and over the years, I had been noticing this rushing wave of once lighter skinned blacks all of a sudden: looking “brown” and golden as honey.
I first noticed it (in Hollywood) with Janet Jackson during the time Poetic Justice came out.
Years before, and just right before the movie, Janet was “light skin” (or wore light skin makeup or whatever).
I mean…her hair was black, bright red lipstick and…she was just…..“light skin.”
All of a sudden, after the movie-she just turned “brown” on us [and shish].
Like: “what happened?”
Remember this moment shortly after the movie was out and popular? Remember that point she turned brown on us all?
She’s not the only one.
I saw it happening with Mary J. Blige (who already was “brown”) but for years she was tanning…and darker brown than we had ever known her to be-ever.
So in that regard (pertaining to what Raven Symone is saying on the footage), I believe that. I saw that happening in Hollywood (and even in our neighborhoods).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KG2MXf-a47I
It was a strange shift—whereas for a long time, there was that inter-race fight of:
- light-skin/dark-skin
turned
- light-skin shaming
and now:
- brown skin being embraced (over “light-skin”–within the race)
Over the past several years now, after Caucasian and all other non-black persons began tanning and looking dark as us (whether we accept it as true or not) the fact is: black people started to be okay with being brown…And then “light-skin” people (in my opinion, like Raven says,) started feeling the pressure to be “brown” (too)…because “light-skin” didn’t seem as “in” anymore.
I can’t see how black people (no matter the hue) don’t notice that. And like them, we (light skin and brown skin) even started tanning too!
Although I totally feel the plight of all the women starring in the documentary (Chante Moore’s, Cynthia McWilliams, Essence Atkins, Connie Deveaux, Erica Hubbard, Valeisha Butterfield, Kim Whitleys, and Amber Rose), we still have footage we still have to talk about how this all “colorism” began…and why this issue isn’t “cultural” anymore (as we keep THINKING it is).
This issue is… [nowadays]:
- social
- personal
- inter-personal
and
- environmental
…not as historical and racially genetic and embedded in us as African Americans/black people—as we keep giving it the excuse as being…
Read on, I’ll explain…
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QJKFupMyvIc
MY WORD WORTH A BILLION BUCKS & A THOUSAND PICTURES
HOW DID WE GET THIS LIGHT-SKIN, DARK-SKIN MINDSET?
It goes (and went) like this:
Considering the fact that among the African American race / “Blacks”-it was taught and thought that the issues of colorism stemmed from an unfortunate time in life when the difference between (literally) how you were slaved was decided on: not by how obedient, or hard working or productive you were-but instead, how close to white (Caucasian) you were (in comparison to other slaves). That difference would put you in “better” working and living conditions (in house) versus more stringent working conditions (outdoors and somewhere on the land inside a shack to live).
The psychology behind those beginnings basically came from the notion that the lighter/closer to white you were (then) although you were still never viewed as a slavemasters equal, you were more “humanized” [over being dehumanized—as were your darker peers/families/slaves].
It is taught and thought (and later theorized) that this frame of thinking somehow spilled its way over into the AA/black culture even after slavery was abolished. Despite the other psychological, sociological, and cultural issues AA/blacks have among one another (as a result of slavery); still, that ONE looming issue hang overhead: COLORISM. Colorism was still a problem even into a time when AA/blacks were free from slavery but now fighting a different form of it known as “civil rights.”
Even around a time when the fabric of AA/black culture was fighting the good fight for issues well over differences in skin color; the fact of the matter is, unfortunately: we made time and room for it in our lives and how we socialized.
But rather than having a slavemaster be the decision maker as to whether or not you would be treated a bit better (based on your skin color), it was a BROWN PAPER BAG having become the slavemaster: used to determine something we still don’t have a word for…—but the fact of matter is, by way of it (the paper bag) no matter how more or less: smart, articulate, kind, generous, spirited, or great a person you were( just as a slavemaster “humanized”) you, your same race of people “idolized,” or “revered,” or “considered” you–over those darker than the paper bag.
That’s just how it’s been-for years past the civil rights movement, into the 70s, 80s, 90s, and into the Millennium—where, around time the all of America started tanning and being okay with being brown…being “brown” started being okay/accepted…
Before American tanned however, through the years (like these ladies on the footage of the show) the inter-race light-skin v dark skin fight took place at many a jobs, homes, schools and anywhere else you lived, worked or played. You just couldn’t escape it: The light skin v dark skin debate.
Sounds very much like the screeching of an old violin, considering the fact that the “victims” (over the years—crying out the most) were (for years) those darker skinned (darker than the paper bag).
But in this new epi of Oprah, we have a group of women on the flip side of the colorism issue letting the world know their side of the same fight—(one that we hardly ever hear about by the way) because like I said: the “victims” were always the darker skinned: 
The darker skinned being ostracized, ridiculed, made to feel less than attractive.
Now, (as with the women on the OWN trailer) we have the lighter skinned women explaining their plight: made to feel guilty, being called stuck up, accused of other inferiority complexes and entitlement issues that each claim they never even had (or gotten fair chances to prove as not being true as accused of-because of the fight, and no understand between either side).
Here we are, well into the “New Millinneum” and something new has happened (as per the women on the trailer): Now they (Raven) feeling the pressures of needing to be darker than that paper bag (really…since America began tanning)…
How the light skin/dark skin mindset began (as I explained above)…is what it was. The origin of how the superiority/inferiority argument between light skin/dark skin cannot be denied. That’s how it began.
So (like, in the “Dark Girls” part of this this OWN documentary), you hear a lot of people talking about their families being more kind and accepting of the lighter skinned grandchild, sibling etc (and vice versa). Situations like that are wholly unfortunate circumstances of the mindset about attitudes of light skin/dark skin being historically/genetically embedded, unfortunately and the adult(s) who perpetuated such things either do, or do not understand the origin of why they do it and (unfortunately) either chose to perpetuate it (knowingly). Or simply don’t understand the origin of why they favor and unfavor and therefore, do it ignorantly (unknowingly).
Whether it be from traditional childhood bullying to being ridiculed for being ‘dark skin’ or accused of having inferiority complexes from being ‘light skin,’ trauma is trauma. When were those ages where we don’t have the capacity to processes and heal past traumatic experiences like such, it does indeed lay dormant in our hearts and minds. And often times, manifests itself in different ways-in how we respond to the world (as adults).
But as adult women (not girls) we can’t keep replaying the light/skin, dark/skin debates without taking the time out to acknowledge the fact that (from my having seen the “Dark Girls” documentary + my having seen the trailers for the “Light Girls” documentary), a lot of these issues are social and environmental—therefore: interpersonal such that we can’t fall back on that traumatized girl being ridiculed for being dark or having being accused of superiority complexes…
If you notice, although in both Light Girls/Dark Girls documentaries, it is all (or majority) women selected to discuss these issues (rather than men).
You know why?
Because men are not having this same types of commentary and dialogue—about being accused of having superiority complexes (from being “light skin”) or suffering from inferiority complexes (from being “dark skin”). They’re just not.
So, (I’ll repeat): Whether it (the light skin/dark skin issue) be by the praise or scorn of grandparents, parents (or even men)…these kinds of issues do indeed have much to do with being ignorant about an origin of such favor and unfavor, but moreover, such commentary about the experiences is more social, environmental, and interpersonal—the socialization of GROWN WOMEN between GROWN WOMEN.
