Posted: Wed 13 Jun 2007 13:55 Post subject: Who is Light skin (I’m Confused)
Who is Light skin (I’m Confused)
Long ago light skin among blacks use to mean yellow, yellowish brown, yellowish red, and whitish. Then you had caramel brown skin and dark skin, in todays time I have noticed that Caramel brown skin has now be added to the light skin tone list, I remember in the 1980s when caramel brown skin was not considered light skin. Some where in the mid 1990s it was added to the light skin complection category. How did this upgrade happen and gain acceptance? Is it a reflection that many caramel skin blacks secretively wish they were light skin, and want to further separate themselves from their fellow dark skin blacks? Is the P. L. (pretty light skin) that admired that people will upgrade a skin complection category? In Africa caramel skin would be considered light skin in certain parts of Africa. But since mulattoes with yellow, yellowish brown, yellowish red, and whitish skin were forced against their will to be a part of the black race this makes them the light skin elite. If mulattos and light skin were given back their own ethnic category then caramel skin would become light skin among black Americans. Now there are caramel brown skin biracials too. These people are apart of the mulattos.
Some black singers, athletes, politicians, and actors who actually are caramel brown skin are called light skin by some blacks and called caramel brown skin by other blacks. Long ago they would have been considered caramel skin.
What is light skin in todays time period, should it stop at caramel skin therefore, making those with dark skin the only blacks in America? Or should Caramel skin go back to being what it basically has always been, and that is a part of the black race’s original skin tone category.
Last edited by MP mulattoprince on Wed 11 Jul 2007 19:36; edited 1 time in total
Joined: 20 Oct 2006 {Posts: 283 } Location: Akron, Ohio
Posted: Wed 13 Jun 2007 16:04 Post subject:
Oh, almost forgot. On my wife's side of the family we have one of those. Unfortunately she will never be able to break the world record in the 100 yard dash. Seen another way, the continual search goes on for that elusive essence.
On my, if only one could run the clock back to a ''better'' place in time.
Yes I know that Barack Obama and Halle Berry are caramel skin mulattoes. But that does not eliminate the fact that, there is a difference between Caramel, dark, and light skin. I am just trying to find out why did caramel skin blacks start calling themselves light skin nothing more.
Was it because they really want to be light skin and vaue light skin more that's all I'am asking? Forget about wh has or don't have light skin.
Right now who cares? I wish I had it but who cares.
If they (the observer) discriminate against you because they see you as simply "Black", then screw them because they aren't worthy to be your friend in the first place. Their loyalty or hospitality relies on whether or not you have visible, recent "Black" admixture or if you are a pure "WASP", IMO. Either way, they aren't sh*t in my opinion for doing that. I'm just saying...
They see us as black because they are following the phony fake one drop blood rule, and they know we are mixed and mulattoes but they are taught to ignore that and label us black. We just want to be able as mulattoes to express all of our genetic bloodlines and heritages without being forced by blacks and whites to publicly only acknowledge our black ancestry. If we acknowledge and celebrate our European ancestry, Native American, Asian or Hispanic ancestry then blacks especially get upset. So getting upset leads to further discord so it is better that we go back to our own mulatto categories and leave blacks and whites with their own categories. It use to be this way. Three categories blacks, whites and mulattoes. Let us all go back to it it was better.
I just had a thought there is no such thing as Light skin. It is a concept because people are not light skinned when compared to the average white skin tone.
The problem with this subject is the reality is muddled together with political aspirations. However, it is really not that confusing when put succintly, so allow me. You have people of various different physical appearances, ranging in color from coal black to snow white. You also have an ethno-racial community in the United States which identifies itself as Black American or AfricanAmerican. Some people in this ethnic group have medium to light skin tones, thus they are called light-skinned blacks, or light-skinned african americans. The question of whether or not they belong to the same race as the black-skinned african americans, depends on how you define race. If you employ the one drop rule, then yes. If you employ some other rule, then probably not. Then again, if you employ the rule that all humans are one race, then again they are the same race. Beyond appearance, none of these ideas is tangible or real, all of them are imagenary, so dont bother too much with semantics.
This whole thread is making my head hurt. Why the incessant need to define skin tone as objectively one thing or the other? What is confusing about the fact that a skin tone is relative, like other colored phenomena? I have an uncle almost as dark as Wesley Snipes and another lighter than Lenny Kravitz. My father is medium brown and would look light next to one and dark next to the other. They'd all look dark next to my great uncle and his wife and kids, who are all melanin-challenged. Yet put them next to this Norwegian albino I saw once and they would look downright swarthy. It's all relative, people.
Considering that many people of African descent not only lighten or darken throughout their lives (or sometimes both), but often also have various shades of brown coexisting peacefully on one body, it make very little sense to me to try and "nail down" the definitive spectrum for "light" or "dark" skin.
Or I am the only person with body parts that would fail or pass whatever color test is to be administered?
I totally disagree with you Sag. I like to objectify things were possible, and this is no different. Skin tone is not relative, it is absolute and can be measured using reflectometry tests ( I believe ). Some people are black, some are white, period. Now, whether or not you perceive their skin color as being "dark", or "light", is a totally different matter. Furthermore, I dont understand what you think is wrong ( if anything ) with my explanation. I thought I put it very clearly in a way that doesnt emotionalize the subject but simply lays it out bare. OH well.
Beauty said: I just had a thought there is no such thing as Light skin. It is a concept because people are not light skinned when compared to the average white skin tone.
You mean to tell there is no brown people *Latinos, India, central Asia etc), yellow people (eastern oriental Asians), red people (Native Americans), black people (Africa), etc. Also white is a shade because you have Pearle white, Ivory, off white, white etc, and black comes in one color remove half an once of black and add water to it you will see that it bleeds navy blue. Black in the color world comes in one color.
If skin tone did not mean anything then why do black America have this dark skin vs. light skin thing if everybody is simply black and a descendant of Africa only? From my observation and opinion it is certain dark skin and certain caramel brown skin blacks who keep this personal animosity going more than light skin and mulattoes -- because they have certain members among them who complain about this more skin tone thing more. Often I hear dark skin and caramel skin blacks complain about rap videos, models, jobs, dating preferences (a new study among black college students recently confirmed this again), etc preferring light skin people and mulattoes. Rapper Kanye West is caramel brown skin and he even let it be known that light skin biracials are preferred in rap and hip hop. He called them mutts (bi racial, light skin, mulattoes).
This is just my opinion based upon my experiences, and if skin tone was irrelevant then everybody needs to be happy with whom they are -- but many are not, so skin tone in their lives matter.
Multtoes, Qudroons, Octoroons, and the P. L. (pretty light) are offering a solution to the problem and that is, go back to the way it use to be. The three categories black, white, mulattoes (mulattos). Blacks who are not light skin or mulattoes are the ones trying their best to hold onto light skin people and mulattoes, but some of them around saying skin tone don’t matter.
Blacks who are not light skin or mulattoes are the ones trying their best to hold onto light skin people and mulattoes, but some of them around saying skin tone don’t matter
Please provide evidence for this statement. After having read many of mulattoprince's posts I am becoming very wary of his rampant generalizations, especially about what "Black" people think and what actions "they" take. I'm starting to envision 12% of the U.S. population marching in lockstep, adhering to some sort of ideology. Because I myself am Black I am starting to think someone forgot to inform me, and hundreds of people like me, of opinions that I do not share and stances that I do not take.
Political advocacy is one thing, generalization without a shred of evidence is another and it is one that I want to eliminate in this forum. Expressing certainty about the motives and psychological states of millions of people is something even the most arrogant quantitative researcher in academia has to couch in less absolute terms.
You have people of various different physical appearances, ranging in color from coal black to snow white.
TheMulattoKid wrote:
I like to objectify things were possible, and this is no different. Skin tone is not relative, it is absolute and can be measured using reflectometry tests ( I believe ). Some people are black, some are white, period.
You claim skin tone is not relative. You are correct, that skin tone can be objectively measured. But common skin color terms are not objective but subjective. People use terms as hyperboles all the time. I have yet to meet a person who objectively is the color of snow or white or coal or black for that matter.
White is Light and Black is dark in coomon usage for skin tone in many languages. So A person that is white and black will be relative to the people making the description and what the average in their culture is.
One person's black can literally be someone else's white.
I totally disagree with you Sag. I like to objectify things were possible, and this is no different. Skin tone is not relative, it is absolute and can be measured using reflectometry tests ( I believe ). Some people are black, some are white, period. Now, whether or not you perceive their skin color as being "dark", or "light", is a totally different matter. Furthermore, I dont understand what you think is wrong ( if anything ) with my explanation. I thought I put it very clearly in a way that doesnt emotionalize the subject but simply lays it out bare. OH well.
TMK
I have never in my life seen an actually black or actually white person. Human skin is not black like coal or white like snow unless I am sorely misinformed. These are similes, linguistic turns of a phrase. They do not describe reality, objectively or otherwise. To my knowledge the people the darkest skin color have a deep, rich brown color. Hold a piece of objectively black coal next to one of them and her skin appears brown. The people with the lightest skin color have a transluscent bluish-pink color. Make a snowball and hold it up to one and his skin will appear pink.
Skin tone is like height, relative. I'm tall relative to 99% of the human population, so I am comfortable concluding that I am tall. Yet. in my family, I'm normal. Around NBA players I would be short. In southern China I would be a walking zoo exhibit. I am the same height in each of these contexts, that doesn't change (we'll leave shoes out of this), but the perception of it does.
What you and mulattoprince seem to be after with this skin color discussion is not to assign objective measurements to inviduals, such as a height measured in feet and inches, but to establish a cut-off point for what can be considered "light" or "dark" by using terms for dessert toppings. Is 5'6" "tall" or"short?" Is 6" describing medium height or extreme height?
You seem to want to control perception of traits by declaring who can and cannot be considered "light" or "dark." Is your aim to create a measurement system and promote its use? To mimick Sherwin Williams or M.A.C. and assign pithy or resonant names for the various stops on the human color spectrum? So one person is a Werther's Orginal, another Belgian Lace, and yet another Choctastic? Do the Werther's Originals have to be called mulattos? Are there no Choctastic Native Americans? Do East Asians get to be called Belgian Lace too or must their names be more ethnically appropriate like Rice Flour?
Personally I find the idea that a given person "cannot be considered" light or dark rather presumptuous. Cannot by whose authority?
Beauty said: I just had a thought there is no such thing as Light skin. It is a concept because people are not light skinned when compared to the average white skin tone.
You mean to tell there is no brown people *Latinos, India, central Asia etc), yellow people (eastern oriental Asians), red people (Native Americans), black people (Africa), etc. Also white is a shade because you have Pearle white, Ivory, off white, white etc, and black comes in one color remove half an once of black and add water to it you will see that it bleeds navy blue. Black in the color world comes in one color.
If skin tone did not mean anything then why do black America have this dark skin vs. light skin thing if everybody is simply black and a descendant of Africa only? From my observation and opinion it is certain dark skin and certain caramel brown skin blacks who keep this personal animosity going more than light skin and mulattoes -- because they have certain members among them who complain about this more skin tone thing more. Often I hear dark skin and caramel skin blacks complain about rap videos, models, jobs, dating preferences (a new study among black college students recently confirmed this again), etc preferring light skin people and mulattoes. Rapper Kanye West is caramel brown skin and he even let it be known that light skin biracials are preferred in rap and hip hop. He called them mutts (bi racial, light skin, mulattoes).
This is just my opinion based upon my experiences, and if skin tone was irrelevant then everybody needs to be happy with whom they are -- but many are not, so skin tone in their lives matter.
Multtoes, Qudroons, Octoroons, and the P. L. (pretty light) are offering a solution to the problem and that is, go back to the way it use to be. The three categories black, white, mulattoes (mulattos). Blacks who are not light skin or mulattoes are the ones trying their best to hold onto light skin people and mulattoes, but some of them around saying skin tone don’t matter.
Mulatto Prince, I don't know what you agenda is, but I didn't say there is are no brown people. Are the colours you are describing people or are you referring to colours in general. I have never seen a real black or whit person, skin tone is relative.
I would like to point out to you, the inhabitants of Africa are not all black. East Asians come in a variety of shades from white to a yellowish colour, brown and reddish brown. Also many South Asians have similar skin tone to black people and some are darker.
Mulatto Prince, I find it interesting you accuse black America of keeping the skin tone obsession alive but you as someone who mulatto/light skin keep bringing it up. Why is that?
'
FAQ
Search
Register
Log in
