Its quite clear that monoracial labels exists. For example, the black power movement in the 60s pretty much solidified "blackness" as an opposite of "whiteness", and all things both ideologies entailed. To combat white purity, blacks created black purity, and they did so by embracing the ODR.
What solidified "blackness" in opposition to "whiteness" happened in centuries prior to the 1960s. The color line in this country is dichotomous and drawn along Black and White lines. Notions of purity were not manufactured at that time in the least. What happened was that some Black Americans decided that there was nothing inherently wrong, ugly or inferior about having a phenotypes classified as sub Saharan African and chose to turn the tables within the culture. The cultural orientation changed. It had nothing to do with "embracing the ODR," which had already been a feature of USAmerican life for generations.
Hanzou wrote:
Black people certainly embrace mixed people as black, but said mixies MUST place the black heritage above any other heritage in order to completely "pass" as a black person. Failure to do so ignites a Tiger Woods-style controversy where the mixie is supposedly ashamed of their blackness.
I respectfully disagree that there is a Black American monolith (unless we are talking about voting behavior). I'd also ask you to clarify what you mean by "black" - you've been here long enough to know that such ambiguous language results in semantic dead ends. If you mean African American or Black American heritage, well yeah, because it is a chosen ethnicity (perhaps out of many possible, perhaps not). If you mean sub Saharan African ancestry, it seems clear that many Black Americans distinguish themselves from Hispanics, Arabs and some Carribean people with SSA ancestry and would not consider them ethnic kin. If you mean Black American culture, then the group formed through the ODR have all shaped it and partake in it, including many "outsiders."
I suspect you are articulating a racial sense of "blackness" and that's not a good idea to do here.
Hanzou wrote:
I never said that a mulatto will look more European than African. I stated that the mulatto will more closely resemble the dominant majority than a black person will thanks to their strong European heritage. This incites jealousy and envy within the black community because it is perceived that this mulatto will gain preferential treatment both within the black community and in the greater society as a whole.
Here's that racial definition of "black" again. Since a whole lot of Black Americans are genetically, culturally and visibly mixed what exactly are you talking about? Since a "strong European heritage" can have nothing to do with self-identity or often appearance, what you seem to be saying is a person's label determines how European or African they look. I don't think so. Not in the U.S.
Hanzou wrote:
The "different social treatment" arose over time. It arose through slavery, with the popular legend of the field slave and the house slave. It arose through emancipation as mulatto children of wealthy land owners and merchants became the early "black elite" of America. It continued through Jim Crow as this same "black elite" made up mostly of mulattoes, conducted paper-bag tests to keep blacks out of their establishments. Finally it continues to be an undercurrent in the modern era, perpetuated by popular media like that Ebony cover, and various other forms of black media. It arises when black mothers pinch the nose of their children so their noses don't become too wide, or via parents treating one child differently than another based purely on skin tone. It emerges when black women gang up on a biracial woman and cut her "pretty hair". It emerges when Tiger Woods gets a black media beat-down because he views himself as "Calblinasian" instead of black.
I see. Do you also catalog the ways in which White Americans make Afro-Euro folks feel inferior and unwanted or is it only important to point out behavior that can be perpetuated by Black Americans? How about the discrimination faced by mulattos who look "too White" or "too Black" for a desired "in-between" phenotype aesthetic? There's enough pathology to go around.
Also, because Black elites benefited from the ODR (a "better to rule in Hell than serve in Heaven" mentality, basically), is it not just as accurate to say that such folks also demanded to be treated "differently?"
Hanzou wrote:
Just for kicks, ask a biracial person to proclaim their pride for their white heritage in a room full of black identified individuals. I did it, and it was a very "educational" experience.
I'm sure! In my experience some Black Americans are overvigilant about being seen as inferior or being looked down upon by someone that has a social status that is perceived to be higher than theirs. These types of people can be set off by any number of things and I personally wish they would go get some help and deal with it. They can be set straight fairly simply, as I have witnessed and experienced myself (not for being biracial but for being culturally or physically different), and if one is willing to get beyond the false bravado to the wounded souls beneath they might even walk away with a new perspective. I have also seen biracial folks express their pride in having a certain ancestry and no one batted an eye, probably because of how they said it.
Its hard for me to believe that you think that a typical African American looks like a mixed person of Japanese/black descent.
Please stop this silly game. We both know that the majority of African Americans in the US don't resemble Kimora Simmons or Tyra Banks. Its like saying the typical white person in the U.S. looks like Cher.
First of all, Hanzou, I never said I thought the typical African American looks like a mixed Japanese/black person. What I said was I don't an image of what a "typical" black person is supposed to look like.
Of course you don't...
Don't ever get into law enforcement.
Quote:
I disagree, because you're assuming that all multi-racial people are going to look one way, and all mono-racial people are going to look a certain way. I also don't believe that simply because the ODR has caused problems, we should just break up people who see themselves as part of of community.
If you disagree then you disagree that colorism exists within the AA community. That's a fairly laughable position to take.
Quote:
Right, but in my experience, a biracial person like Alicia Keys who says she is "black" isn't seen as 100% black by self-identified black people. They realize that she's biracial, but she identifies with the black community. The same with my Japanese-black friend. We all know her dad is Japanese, but we also know that she identifies with the AA community.
And if Alicia Keys suddenly started calling herself "white", how do you think the AA community would react?
Quote:
Right, but what do you suppose Iman and Alek Wek mean when they say "black". Because they're not Americans, and they're obviously not from the same country or "tribe/race/ethnicity". So what do you think they mean when they say "We are black models"??
Beats me. It could mean a number of things. I work with African immigrants who call themselves "black" all the time, but they don't consider themselves the same race as African Americans.
Its quite clear that monoracial labels exists. For example, the black power movement in the 60s pretty much solidified "blackness" as an opposite of "whiteness", and all things both ideologies entailed. To combat white purity, blacks created black purity, and they did so by embracing the ODR.
What solidified "blackness" in opposition to "whiteness" happened in centuries prior to the 1960s. The color line in this country is dichotomous and drawn along Black and White lines. Notions of purity were not manufactured at that time in the least. What happened was that some Black Americans decided that there was nothing inherently wrong, ugly or inferior about having a phenotypes classified as sub Saharan African and chose to turn the tables within the culture. The cultural orientation changed. It had nothing to do with "embracing the ODR," which had already been a feature of USAmerican life for generations.
Black solidarity made embracing sub-Saharan African phenotypes a talking point, not a practice. Which is why in 2008, we still have clearly mixed-looking women as the standard bearers of AA beauty, and colorism running rampant within the black community. The ODR is a contradiction to many tenants within the black power movement, but at the same time, beneficial to black solidarity.
Now we have this bizarre situation where "black is beautiful" is personified by a mixed woman like Halle Berry of Tyra Banks.
Quote:
I respectfully disagree that there is a Black American monolith (unless we are talking about voting behavior). I'd also ask you to clarify what you mean by "black" - you've been here long enough to know that such ambiguous language results in semantic dead ends. If you mean African American or Black American heritage, well yeah, because it is a chosen ethnicity (perhaps out of many possible, perhaps not). If you mean sub Saharan African ancestry, it seems clear that many Black Americans distinguish themselves from Hispanics, Arabs and some Carribean people with SSA ancestry and would not consider them ethnic kin. If you mean Black American culture, then the group formed through the ODR have all shaped it and partake in it, including many "outsiders."
Yes I am talking about Black American/African American heritage.
You just proved that there is a black monolith when it comes to political thought. Race is politics, so obviously when it comes to black politics, if you don't tow the party line, you're ostracized, beliittled, or worse. For example, Obama was considered "not black enough" by many African American pundits early in the campaign, once he proved his "blackness", he received 90% of the black vote.
Quote:
I suspect you are articulating a racial sense of "blackness" and that's not a good idea to do here.
Actually its an ideological sense of blackness. The ODR has eroded "black" into little more than that.
Quote:
Here's that racial definition of "black" again. Since a whole lot of Black Americans are genetically, culturally and visibly mixed what exactly are you talking about? Since a "strong European heritage" can have nothing to do with self-identity or often appearance, what you seem to be saying is a person's label determines how European or African they look. I don't think so. Not in the U.S.
There aren't too many people with 2 black parents who look similar to someone with a black parent and a white parent. I'm sure you're well aware of that. I don't think I have to point out someone looking like Alicia Keys will be treated differently than someone looking like India Aerie do I?
Quote:
I see. Do you also catalog the ways in which White Americans make Afro-Euro folks feel inferior and unwanted or is it only important to point out behavior that can be perpetuated by Black Americans? How about the discrimination faced by mulattos who look "too White" or "too Black" for a desired "in-between" phenotype aesthetic? There's enough pathology to go around.
I agree completely. However since we were talking about blacks, I only discussed blacks.
Also I didn't feel like typing 2 long paragraphs.
Quote:
Also, because Black elites benefited from the ODR (a "better to rule in Hell than serve in Heaven" mentality, basically), is it not just as accurate to say that such folks also demanded to be treated "differently?"
Absolutely. My point was/is that this mentality has trickled down to the modern day, and both "lightskinned blacks" and "darkskinned blacks" are guilty of perpetuating it. To bring it back to the original discussion, this mentality is exemplified by that cover on Ebony Magazine.
Hanzou wrote:
Just for kicks, ask a biracial person to proclaim their pride for their white heritage in a room full of black identified individuals. I did it, and it was a very "educational" experience.
Quote:
I'm sure! In my experience some Black Americans are overvigilant about being seen as inferior or being looked down upon by someone that has a social status that is perceived to be higher than theirs. These types of people can be set off by any number of things and I personally wish they would go get some help and deal with it. They can be set straight fairly simply, as I have witnessed and experienced myself (not for being biracial but for being culturally or physically different), and if one is willing to get beyond the false bravado to the wounded souls beneath they might even walk away with a new perspective. I have also seen biracial folks express their pride in having a certain ancestry and no one batted an eye, probably because of how they said it.
I do think that part of the reason my "proclamation" wasn't received well was because I then proceeded to consider myself "mulatto" and not black. So yes, its certainly how you say it.
Joined: 07 Oct 2007 {Posts: 248 } Location: United States
Posted: Sat 31 May 2008 00:58 Post subject:
Hanzou wrote:
As for calling yourself "black" doesn't deny that you also have "white" heritage, isn't that rather contradictory? Why not simply consider yourself "biracial" or "mulatto" unless you're trying to hide your other identity?
Not sure why not. Maybe the terms "bi-racial" and "mulatto" aren't specific enough?
Quote:
I do believe I answered that question in the very post you just quoted.
No, you didn't. If the purpose of models on an ebony cover are to represent the standards of African American beauty, then why aren't you complaining that two non-african americans are on it? Maybe you're not getting my point. What makes you think the cover was made specifically to communicate standards of AA beauty if not all of the models are AA?
[quote=Grasshoppa]Please be clear with your usage of the word "black." I am not sure if by black you mean AA or SubSaharan. If it is the former, how are you so sure Tyra Banks is of mixed heritage? Do you have proof that she is aware of people in her family whom are not African American?[/quote]
Quote:
Show me an indigenous SSA African tribe with women who look like Tyra Banks. Clearly, Banks has some European ancestry, which has assisted her rise in the super model world.?
Notice, that by heritage, I assumed you meant ethnic heritage and not genetic heritage. You were not specific with your usage of of the word "black". Tyra Banks may cleary have some European ancestry, but Tyra does not clearly have non-AA heritage. Phenotype is not necessarily the best way to tell ethnic group, especially within the AA community. So, I ask the question again: do you have proof that this woman is aware of people in her family whom are not AA?
As for calling yourself "black" doesn't deny that you also have "white" heritage, isn't that rather contradictory? Why not simply consider yourself "biracial" or "mulatto" unless you're trying to hide your other identity?
Not sure why not. Maybe the terms "bi-racial" and "mulatto" aren't specific enough?
Biracial is a rather broad term, but "mulatto" means someone of black/white heritage. You don't get more specific than that.
Quote:
I do believe I answered that question in the very post you just quoted.
Quote:
No, you didn't. If the purpose of models on an ebony cover are to represent the standards of African American beauty, then why aren't you complaining that two non-african americans are on it? Maybe you're not getting my point. What makes you think the cover was made specifically to communicate standards of AA beauty if not all of the models are AA?
Because once again, Wek and Iman are not AA women, so it doesn't matter. The cover was made to communicate to AA standards of beauty because Ebony is targeted towards that demographic. Always has been, always will be.
Quote:
Notice, that by heritage, I assumed you meant ethnic heritage and not genetic heritage. You were not specific with your usage of of the word "black". Tyra Banks may cleary have some European ancestry, but Tyra does not clearly have non-AA heritage. Phenotype is not necessarily the best way to tell ethnic group, especially within the AA community. So, I ask the question again: do you have proof that this woman is aware of people in her family whom are not AA?
How would I have proof of what Tyra Banks is "aware of"?
Its fairly obvious that Tyra Banks and Kimora Lee Simmons aren't atypical of the black phenotype in America. Honestly when you think of a black American woman, does an image of Tyra or Kimora pop in your head? The majority of black women don't resemble either one of these "African Americans", yet these two women are propped up as images of "black beauty" within the black media.
It might be hard for you to believe, but I don't have an image of a "typical black American woman." I grew up with a black-Japanese family, and their daughter was a good friend of mine, and I always saw her as black. Many of the black women in my family look like Tyra Banks and Iman and Alek Wek.
It's hard for me to put one face on a "black woman" since so many black women have different faces. That would be like saying the typical white American woman looks like XYZ. It's just not in my mind to think like that. Sorry to disappoint.
Its hard for me to believe that you think that a typical African American looks like a mixed person of Japanese/black descent.
hmmm
There may not be a lot of AA identified women who look like Kimora. There may not be a lot of AA/Asian mixes for that. I do know and grew up with a good deal of AA who everyone thought was part Chinese, including my dad and his siblings who's father is 1/2Native American.
Kimora is also raising 2 daughters who are not biracial yet mixed.
Tyra Banks, I would say there is a good number of AA women who look like Tyra(non biracial). What does a typical AA look like though, where I come from 1/2 of the AA population looks mixed.
Please stop this silly game. We both know that the majority of African Americans in the US don't resemble Kimora Simmons or Tyra Banks. Its like saying the typical white person in the U.S. looks like Cher.
I grew up with and went to High School with a good number of non-biracial AA's with grey hazel light brown and green eyes. that wasn't uncommon. Interestingling, I've found that a lot of people with light eyes are the children of black/biracial parents Griffes & marabous.
Quote:
How does this damage black people? It damages them in the form of colorism.
But colorism doesn't arise because some people have different skin colors. It arises when people add superficial qualities to these skin colors. The problem isn't that these models are labeled as "black". The problem happens when people only see "XYZ" face as "black".
I disagree. Colorism arises when you try to push a mono-racial label onto a multi-racial group of people. In a society dominated by the caucasian phenotype, its obvious that "blacks" with a phenotype closer to the majority would prosper more than blacks farther from the majority.
Women maybe, men who are more on the Nubian Mandigo side are much more prominent. the Attraction factor for the darker nubian male is much more higher than the mixed male.
ODR damages both groups because it doesn't allow blacks to properly combat racism against black people, and it actually enhances interal racism within the black group.
Quote:
How does this damage mixed-race people? It makes them feel guilty for claiming a non-black heritage, or it weakens their ability to claim a non-black heritage when people with obvious mixed heritage claims to be 100% black.
Afterall, Kimora Lee Simmons claims to be black, yet she looks Asian. What's your problem with blackness mixie?
Sorry, Kimora does not claim to be only black, she identifies as multiracial. But she also sees herself as a 100% Black woman and a 100% Asian woman.
Just to clarify, I'm in no way saying that these women don't have a right to consider themselves "black women".
Quote:
What do you mean by "100%" black? Just so I can understand your argument.
Re-read the statement. Its fairly obvious what I meant. A mixed-race person who claims they aren't mixed, i.e. passing for "black" or "white". Obviously the latter is looked down upon in the black community, but the former is accepted and even encouraged.[/quote]
Last edited by gemini072 on Sat 31 May 2008 04:54; edited 1 time in total
As for calling yourself "black" doesn't deny that you also have "white" heritage, isn't that rather contradictory? Why not simply consider yourself "biracial" or "mulatto" unless you're trying to hide your other identity?
Not sure why not. Maybe the terms "bi-racial" and "mulatto" aren't specific enough?
Biracial is a rather broad term, but "mulatto" means someone of black/white heritage. You don't get more specific than that.
Quote:
I do believe I answered that question in the very post you just quoted.
Quote:
No, you didn't. If the purpose of models on an ebony cover are to represent the standards of African American beauty, then why aren't you complaining that two non-african americans are on it? Maybe you're not getting my point. What makes you think the cover was made specifically to communicate standards of AA beauty if not all of the models are AA?
Because once again, Wek and Iman are not AA women, so it doesn't matter. The cover was made to communicate to AA standards of beauty because Ebony is targeted towards that demographic. Always has been, always will be.
Ebony has been in business since what the 50's or 60's, they have their audience, and I don't believe they were communicating that to AA's. If we all look at the cover of the magazine and even read it, looking at the pictures as well as articles... It is about Fashion and no one can dispute Tyra Kimora Iman and Elek as the top of the game,
all 4 represent different aspects of the modeling world at this time.
I believe it is that simple.
Quote:
Notice, that by heritage, I assumed you meant ethnic heritage and not genetic heritage. You were not specific with your usage of of the word "black". Tyra Banks may cleary have some European ancestry, but Tyra does not clearly have non-AA heritage. Phenotype is not necessarily the best way to tell ethnic group, especially within the AA community. So, I ask the question again: do you have proof that this woman is aware of people in her family whom are not AA?
How would I have proof of what Tyra Banks is "aware of"?
Its quite clear that monoracial labels exists. For example, the black power movement in the 60s pretty much solidified "blackness" as an opposite of "whiteness", and all things both ideologies entailed. To combat white purity, blacks created black purity, and they did so by embracing the ODR.
What solidified "blackness" in opposition to "whiteness" happened in centuries prior to the 1960s. The color line in this country is dichotomous and drawn along Black and White lines. Notions of purity were not manufactured at that time in the least. What happened was that some Black Americans decided that there was nothing inherently wrong, ugly or inferior about having a phenotypes classified as sub Saharan African and chose to turn the tables within the culture. The cultural orientation changed. It had nothing to do with "embracing the ODR," which had already been a feature of USAmerican life for generations.
Black solidarity made embracing sub-Saharan African phenotypes a talking point, not a practice. Which is why in 2008, we still have clearly mixed-looking women as the standard bearers of AA beauty, and colorism running rampant within the black community. The ODR is a contradiction to many tenants within the black power movement, but at the same time, beneficial to black solidarity.
Now we have this bizarre situation where "black is beautiful" is personified by a mixed woman like Halle Berry of Tyra Banks.
Quote:
I respectfully disagree that there is a Black American monolith (unless we are talking about voting behavior). I'd also ask you to clarify what you mean by "black" - you've been here long enough to know that such ambiguous language results in semantic dead ends. If you mean African American or Black American heritage, well yeah, because it is a chosen ethnicity (perhaps out of many possible, perhaps not). If you mean sub Saharan African ancestry, it seems clear that many Black Americans distinguish themselves from Hispanics, Arabs and some Carribean people with SSA ancestry and would not consider them ethnic kin. If you mean Black American culture, then the group formed through the ODR have all shaped it and partake in it, including many "outsiders."
Yes I am talking about Black American/African American heritage.
You just proved that there is a black monolith when it comes to political thought. Race is politics, so obviously when it comes to black politics, if you don't tow the party line, you're ostracized, beliittled, or worse. For example, Obama was considered "not black enough" by many African American pundits early in the campaign, once he proved his "blackness", he received 90% of the black vote.
I don't recall this questioning of his blackness by many AA pundits. I remember 1 guy who was running against him for Illinois or Ohio who tried to make a deal about Obama not really being able to represent AA. He was shut down by AA
How did he prove his blackness.
He had 95% of the black vote before that anyway.
Quote:
I suspect you are articulating a racial sense of "blackness" and that's not a good idea to do here.
Actually its an ideological sense of blackness. The ODR has eroded "black" into little more than that.
Quote:
Here's that racial definition of "black" again. Since a whole lot of Black Americans are genetically, culturally and visibly mixed what exactly are you talking about? Since a "strong European heritage" can have nothing to do with self-identity or often appearance, what you seem to be saying is a person's label determines how European or African they look. I don't think so. Not in the U.S.
There aren't too many people with 2 black parents who look similar to someone with a black parent and a white parent. I'm sure you're well aware of that. I don't think I have to point out someone looking like Alicia Keys will be treated differently than someone looking like India Aerie do I?
It goes by individuals really. Some people won't treat them any different. Many biracial people who have children with AA's ranging of course from Wesley Snipe/Woopie G. looks to much more multiracial looks have children that resemble biracial children. Halle Berry looks similar to Vivica Fox Nia Long Sanaa Lathan Jada Pinkett-Smith and the list goes on.
Quote:
I see. Do you also catalog the ways in which White Americans make Afro-Euro folks feel inferior and unwanted or is it only important to point out behavior that can be perpetuated by Black Americans? How about the discrimination faced by mulattos who look "too White" or "too Black" for a desired "in-between" phenotype aesthetic? There's enough pathology to go around.
I agree completely. However since we were talking about blacks, I only discussed blacks.
That's how it usually goes anyway... most people are only discussiong blacks.
Also I didn't feel like typing 2 long paragraphs.
Quote:
Also, because Black elites benefited from the ODR (a "better to rule in Hell than serve in Heaven" mentality, basically), is it not just as accurate to say that such folks also demanded to be treated "differently?"
Absolutely. My point was/is that this mentality has trickled down to the modern day, and both "lightskinned blacks" and "darkskinned blacks" are guilty of perpetuating it. To bring it back to the original discussion, this mentality is exemplified by that cover on Ebony Magazine.
Hanzou wrote:
Just for kicks, ask a biracial person to proclaim their pride for their white heritage in a room full of black identified individuals. I did it, and it was a very "educational" experience.
Quote:
I'm sure! In my experience some Black Americans are overvigilant about being seen as inferior or being looked down upon by someone that has a social status that is perceived to be higher than theirs. These types of people can be set off by any number of things and I personally wish they would go get some help and deal with it. They can be set straight fairly simply, as I have witnessed and experienced myself (not for being biracial but for being culturally or physically different), and if one is willing to get beyond the false bravado to the wounded souls beneath they might even walk away with a new perspective. I have also seen biracial folks express their pride in having a certain ancestry and no one batted an eye, probably because of how they said it.
I do think that part of the reason my "proclamation" wasn't received well was because I then proceeded to consider myself "mulatto" and not black. So yes, its certainly how you say it.
Last edited by gemini072 on Sun 01 Jun 2008 02:02; edited 1 time in total
Its fairly obvious that Tyra Banks and Kimora Lee Simmons aren't atypical of the black phenotype in America. Honestly when you think of a black American woman, does an image of Tyra or Kimora pop in your head?
African American women come in a wide range of phenotypes. I wouldn't say a person with tyra banks' phenotype is out of the African American range of phenotypes at all. Kimora lee on the other hand is pretty far off, but I see nothing wrong with her non-AA looking phenotype.
So you acknowledge that Kimora Lee is far off the AA phenotype, yet you have no problem with her being associated with the AA phenotype? You don't see the contradiction in that statement?
Quote:
The majority of black women don't resemble either one of these "African Americans", yet these two women are propped up as images of "black beauty" within the black media.
A majority of "african american" women don't look like alek wek either, yet she is propped up as an image of black beauty.
Alek Wek isn't African American. So its not surprising that the majority of AA women don't look like her. However, Tyra and Kimora are considered AA, and its damaging when they are the standards of AA beauty in the US when the majority of AA women don't resemble them.
Grasshoppa wrote:
How does this damage black people? It damages them in the form of colorism.
Quote:
please explain to me how it damages them in the form of colorism. I see no common look between these four women, so I can't gather how it would lead to colorism.
I've already explained it in another post.
Quote:
How does this damage mixed-race people? It makes them feel guilty for claiming a non-black heritage, or it weakens their ability to claim a non-black heritage when people with obvious mixed heritage claims to be 100% black.
Claiming to be black does not necessarily negate any other ethnic backgrounds.[/quote]
Yes it does, since in most cases "black" is only a portion of the heritage. Claiming "blackness" means that a portion of your heritage overrides anything else. Tyra Banks for example is of clear mixed heritage, but she considers herself a black woman, not a mixed woman. Halle Berry is another example, though it would be interesting to hear her perspective after having a child with a white man.
Quote:
Afterall, Kimora Lee Simmons claims to be black, yet she looks Asian. What's your problem with blackness mixie?
I believe Kimora Lee has stated that she's 100% black and 100% Asian. Like I said, claiming to be black does not necessarily mean that is all you claim.[/quote]
Then how do you explain Halle Berry and Tyra Banks?[/quote]
Halle is another that many did not think or assume she was biracial in her early career. I didn't know shew was. I knew a lot of a AA women with the same complexion and features she did. Even the same hairstyle
Vivica Fox, Nia Long are 2 with similar looks
The way she wears her hair now gives her more of a 'mulatta' look. But Halle was a favorite earlier on. She hot, she's beautiful. Is she a standard for Black American beauty? I don't know if she is seen that way.
Phylicia Rashad-Allen during the 80's was lauded as the most beautiful woman something something (it was noted in the article she'd be perfect if her nose was a bit thinner) Jodie Watley was in a similar catagory in the 80's by Rolling Stone I believe.
In most western countries, the stereotypical sub-saharan phenotype is considered ugly, or even sub-human. It's "stereotypical" because people wrongly associate the wide nose/big lips look with all Africans. Alek Wek has this look, so it shouldn't come as a surprise that she hasn't recieved any beauty awards from the Black community.
Black people generally categorize each other as dark, "medium" or light. Obviously most Black women fall into the dark category, while a significant but smaller number of them have a light-brown or "medium" complexion. If it weren't for makeup and light-colored hair weaves, Tyra Banks would fall into the "medium" category. She, like Beyonce, clearly has some non-black ancestry but she still looks black.
Dark women like Gabrielle Union and Aisha Tyler are regarded as highly attractive in the black community and they don't look mixed, although they look slightly less African than Alek Wek.
I do think that light skinned black and mulatto women are over represented in black media but there's no solid proof that magazines have the power to influence who black men date and marry. Skin color does not determine physical attractiveness in the black community, its about facial features, and strong african features are considered less feminine in our soceity. Sadly, black women who don't conform to the white ideal are regarded as afrocentric, separatist etc.
In most western countries, the stereotypical sub-saharan phenotype is considered ugly, or even sub-human.
It's "stereotypical" because people wrongly associate the wide nose/big lips look with all Africans. Alek Wek has this look, so it shouldn't come as a surprise that she hasn't recieved any beauty awards from the Black community.
Black people generally categorize each other as dark, "medium" or light. Obviously most Black women fall into the dark category, while a significant but smaller number of them have a light-brown or "medium" complexion. If it weren't for makeup and light-colored hair weaves, Tyra Banks would fall into the "medium" category.
Actually the makeup and tanning makes her darker. Tyra is fairer in complextion, and does have a brown golden tint natural hair color.
I ask at times what is medium. I think Halle is 'Medium' but others say she is Light, but those term don't work most of the time.
I've found that Medium tends to fit a wide range of complexions that some would call light other would call dark.
She, like Beyonce, clearly has some non-black ancestry but she still looks black.
hmmm, she doesn't look black, you might be thinking I can tell she has African ancestry or something like that, but she doesn't look black.
Dark women like Gabrielle Union and Aisha Tyler are regarded as highly attractive in the black community and they don't look mixed, although they look slightly less African than Alek Wek.
I agree.
I do think that light skinned black and mulatto women are over represented in black media but there's no solid proof that magazines have the power to influence who black men date and marry. Skin color does not determine physical attractiveness in the black community, its about facial features, and strong african features are regarded as less feminine in our soceity. Sadly, black women who don't conform to the white ideal are regarded as afrocentric, separatist etc.
Joined: 07 Oct 2007 {Posts: 248 } Location: United States
Posted: Sat 31 May 2008 09:13 Post subject:
Hanzou wrote:
Because once again, Wek and Iman are not AA women, so it doesn't matter. The cover was made to communicate to AA standards of beauty because Ebony is targeted towards that demographic. Always has been, always will be.
Yeah it does matter, if they are on the cover. I believe the cover was made to communicate the AA idea of "black racial" beauty. As we all know, many AAs have a broad idea of the "black race" even though there is no evidence of it existing in the genetic sense. My point is, that a. there is no one "AA phenotype", and b. that AAs are racialists and have a broad idea of what "black" means. As AA's consider themselves part of the larger "black race", they think that there are many phenotypes included that they themselves do not have. This includes the phenotypes of non-americans and mixed americans. So, yes it does matter that Iman and Wek aren't american, because they're on a magazine that supposedly communicates a broad idea of "black racial" beauty.
So, you should be complaining about Wek and Iman as well, because the readers most likely look nothing like Wek and Iman. The fact that they're non-American does not mean it doesn't affect the AA standard of beauty. Many AA's don't believe in the line that separates AAs and Africans when it comes to "beauty" because of racialism. Regardless of their country of origin, they are seen as "black", thus the AA community "accepts" their phenotypes as being those other phenotypes of the "black race". Being non-American does not exclude WEk and Iman from the AA standard of "black racial" beauty. Being non-American does not mean Iman and Wek don't communicate to the reader a standard of beauty.
Quote:
How would I have proof of what Tyra Banks is "aware of"?
Because you said yourself: "tyra is clearly of mixed heritage." Prove to me that Tyra is of mixed ethnic heritage. Obviously, banks has genetic Euro admixture, but so do a crap load of other AAs. That does not necessarily mean that they have a mixed ethnic heritage.
Joined: 07 Oct 2007 {Posts: 248 } Location: United States
Posted: Sat 31 May 2008 10:01 Post subject:
BlackHaze wrote:
If it weren't for makeup and light-colored hair weaves, Tyra Banks would fall into the "medium" category. She, like Beyonce, clearly has some non-black ancestry but she still looks black.
Frank is going to ask you to define what looking "black" is. Looking "black" is relative to the observer. Tyra Banks falling into the "medium" category is relative to your own conceptions of light and dark.
Quote:
Skin color does not determine physical attractiveness in the black community, its about facial features, and strong african features are considered less feminine in our soceity.
Strong african features may be considered as less femine. But I would not say that skin color doesn't determine attractiveness in the AA community. Many people in fact DO have a preference for certain skin colors specifically, sometimes regardless of features. This is just like how many people have a preference for hair color in say, the white american community. I have no proof that there is a trend, but I'd assume that lighter skinned women in the AA community, and blondes in the white community are preferred perhaps a bit more than others. Again, it's just speculation, but I actually do think some of it has to do with the color itself, and not just the features.
To give an opinion, I admit that I have a preference for mixed phenotypes when it comes to facial features. I can't necessarily say that I have a preference for lighter skin, though. I know that I prefer women of obviously mixed ancestry, but those women usually have some discernable African ancestry.
Hmmm...I think it would be great to test myself though. Perhaps we could form an experiment in which many facial types are given, but each in a couple color variations. Maybe we could use 3 colors, and about 10 different facial features, meaning 30 in all. We could maybe randomize the facial types so that you're not directly given a choice between the same features. For each question, one would have to pick which face is most attractive and from there, we could see if there was a trend. I supposed we'd also have to test people with those same 10 faces, but without skin color what so ever, for a control (I think that's what you call it).
Because once again, Wek and Iman are not AA women, so it doesn't matter. The cover was made to communicate to AA standards of beauty because Ebony is targeted towards that demographic. Always has been, always will be.
Yeah it does matter, if they are on the cover. I believe the cover was made to communicate the AA idea of "black racial" beauty. As we all know, many AAs have a broad idea of the "black race" even though there is no evidence of it existing in the genetic sense. My point is, that a. there is no one "AA phenotype", and b. that AAs are racialists and have a broad idea of what "black" means. As AA's consider themselves part of the larger "black race", they think that there are many phenotypes included that they themselves do not have. This includes the phenotypes of non-americans and mixed americans. So, yes it does matter that Iman and Wek aren't american, because they're on a magazine that supposedly communicates a broad idea of "black racial" beauty.
It doesn't matter because AAs know that Iman and Wek aren't AAs, thus the fact that they are on the cover is a non-issue. However Banks and Kimora are known to be AAs or part of the AA community in some sense. Despite the fact that AAs have a broad idea of the black race's phenotype, the majority of AAs do not share the phenotype of Tyra Banks or Kimora Lee. Thus the cover perpetuates colorism because it showcases a standard of beauty that many AAs can't achieve.
Your points were never my argument in the first place. I never argued that there was one black phenotype, and I'm fully aware that black Americans believe that they come in a multitude of hues.
Quote:
So, you should be complaining about Wek and Iman as well, because the readers most likely look nothing like Wek and Iman. The fact that they're non-American does not mean it doesn't affect the AA standard of beauty. Many AA's don't believe in the line that separates AAs and Africans when it comes to "beauty" because of racialism. Regardless of their country of origin, they are seen as "black", thus the AA community "accepts" their phenotypes as being those other phenotypes of the "black race". Being non-American does not exclude WEk and Iman from the AA standard of "black racial" beauty. Being non-American does not mean Iman and Wek don't communicate to the reader a standard of beauty.
I disagree. Many AAs certainly do separate themselves from Africans, and vice versa. They may see each other as the same "race", but not the same people. Africans are viewed as immigrants, exotics, or whatever else, but they aren't readily embraced in AA communities as if they're long lost cousins of something. Part of that is purely physical appearance, since Africans in most cases, don't resemble AAs in most cases. Part of it is also cultural and linguistic. Thus when a woman looks at the Ebony cover, she'll see Wek and Iman and realize that both women don't represent her, her people, or her community. However Kimora and Tyra do.
Quote:
How would I have proof of what Tyra Banks is "aware of"?
Quote:
Because you said yourself: "tyra is clearly of mixed heritage." Prove to me that Tyra is of mixed ethnic heritage. Obviously, banks has genetic Euro admixture, but so do a crap load of other AAs. That does not necessarily mean that they have a mixed ethnic heritage.
I do believe that one of the definitions of "ethnic" is as follows;
Quote:
2 a: of or relating to large groups of people classed according to common racial, national, tribal, religious, linguistic, or cultural origin or background
Since you agree that Tyra has genetic Euro-African admixture, she is of mixed "ethnic" heritage.
Joined: 07 Oct 2007 {Posts: 248 } Location: United States
Posted: Sat 31 May 2008 14:25 Post subject:
Hanzou wrote:
It doesn't matter because AAs know that Iman and Wek aren't AAs, thus the fact that they are on the cover is a non-issue. However Banks and Kimora are known to be AAs or part of the AA community in some sense. Despite the fact that AAs have a broad idea of the black race's phenotype, the majority of AAs do not share the phenotype of Tyra Banks or Kimora Lee. Thus the cover perpetuates colorism because it showcases a standard of beauty that many AAs can't achieve.
Now I don't disagree that the standard of beauty are unbalanced, but you're acting as if only obviously mixed people are represented in the media. Tyra and Kimora are not the only people that represent the AA standard of beauty. Gabrielle Union, Nia Long, Naomi Cambell, Sanaa Lathan, Vivica Fox, etc...Some visibly mixed, but none would stick out in an AA crowd. And actually, a phenotype similar to tyra banks' is not all that uncommon in the AA community. Many of my female AA friends are not much more SSA "looking" than Tyra. That goes for a majority of my family members as well.
Quote:
Thus when a woman looks at the Ebony cover, she'll see Wek and Iman and realize that both women don't represent her, her people, or her community. However Kimora and Tyra do.
I'm sure people recognize that Kimora is mixed. LOL, I doubt anyone is going to be affected greatly by one mixed Asian woman who identifies as AA. And what's wrong with Tyra and Kimora representing an AA woman's people or her community if they identify as black? Simply because they don't look like the majority of AAs? Some AA identified women do in fact look like these women (and imo many look like tyra). Like I said, these are not the only women that ebony has ever put on covers to represent AAs.
Quote:
How would I have proof of what Tyra Banks is "aware of"?
[quote]
I do believe that one of the definitions of "ethnic" is as follows;
Quote:
2 a: of or relating to large groups of people classed according to common racial, national, tribal, religious, linguistic, or cultural origin or background
Since you agree that Tyra has genetic Euro-African admixture, she is of mixed "ethnic" heritage.
ehh...semantics. By ethnic, I mean ethnic group, which imo denotes cultural ties. I believe ethnicity is more specific than something such as "race" which has no objective meaning. Plus, I think "ethnic group" eliminates confusion when it comes to "race" in the US. If tyra's parents were both identified AAs, then it seems strange that Tyra would identify as anything other than AA. If I go by your definition of "ethnic" then that means most AAs regardless of phenotype are of mixed ethnic heritage.
Because once again, Wek and Iman are not AA women, so it doesn't matter. The cover was made to communicate to AA standards of beauty because Ebony is targeted towards that demographic. Always has been, always will be.
Yeah it does matter, if they are on the cover. I believe the cover was made to communicate the AA idea of "black racial" beauty. As we all know, many AAs have a broad idea of the "black race" even though there is no evidence of it existing in the genetic sense. My point is, that a. there is no one "AA phenotype", and b. that AAs are racialists and have a broad idea of what "black" means. As AA's consider themselves part of the larger "black race", they think that there are many phenotypes included that they themselves do not have. This includes the phenotypes of non-americans and mixed americans. So, yes it does matter that Iman and Wek aren't american, because they're on a magazine that supposedly communicates a broad idea of "black racial" beauty.
It doesn't matter because AAs know that Iman and Wek aren't AAs, thus the fact that they are on the cover is a non-issue. However Banks and Kimora are known to be AAs or part of the AA community in some sense. Despite the fact that AAs have a broad idea of the black race's phenotype, the majority of AAs do not share the phenotype of Tyra Banks or Kimora Lee. Thus the cover perpetuates colorism because it showcases a standard of beauty that many AAs can't achieve.
Your arguing a case that THis IS WhaT EBONY is trying to do. I totally disagree. Its a Modelling-Fashion Issue. But you seem to want to stay on this course that Ebony has some hidden agenda to present something to black americans and american in general.
Your points were never my argument in the first place. I never argued that there was one black phenotype, and I'm fully aware that black Americans believe that they come in a multitude of hues.
Quote:
So, you should be complaining about Wek and Iman as well, because the readers most likely look nothing like Wek and Iman. The fact that they're non-American does not mean it doesn't affect the AA standard of beauty. Many AA's don't believe in the line that separates AAs and Africans when it comes to "beauty" because of racialism. Regardless of their country of origin, they are seen as "black", thus the AA community "accepts" their phenotypes as being those other phenotypes of the "black race". Being non-American does not exclude WEk and Iman from the AA standard of "black racial" beauty. Being non-American does not mean Iman and Wek don't communicate to the reader a standard of beauty.
I disagree. Many AAs certainly do separate themselves from Africans, and vice versa. They may see each other as the same "race", but not the same people. Africans are viewed as immigrants, exotics, or whatever else, but they aren't readily embraced in AA communities as if they're long lost cousins of something. Part of that is purely physical appearance, since Africans in most cases, don't resemble AAs in most cases. Part of it is also cultural and linguistic. Thus when a woman looks at the Ebony cover, she'll see Wek and Iman and realize that both women don't represent her, her people, or her community. However Kimora and Tyra do.
Quote:
How would I have proof of what Tyra Banks is "aware of"?
Quote:
Because you said yourself: "tyra is clearly of mixed heritage." Prove to me that Tyra is of mixed ethnic heritage. Obviously, banks has genetic Euro admixture, but so do a crap load of other AAs. That does not necessarily mean that they have a mixed ethnic heritage.
I do believe that one of the definitions of "ethnic" is as follows;
Quote:
2 a: of or relating to large groups of people classed according to common racial, national, tribal, religious, linguistic, or cultural origin or background
Since you agree that Tyra has genetic Euro-African admixture, she is of mixed "ethnic" heritage.
In most western countries, the stereotypical sub-saharan phenotype is considered ugly, or even sub-human. It's "stereotypical" because people wrongly associate the wide nose/big lips look with all Africans. Alek Wek has this look, so it shouldn't come as a surprise that she hasn't recieved any beauty awards from the Black community.
In many non-western countries too: parts of Eastern Europe, East Asia, and as uncomfortable as this may be for some to recognize, parts of the Middle East and Africa (i.e., the Horn of Africa).
Quote:
I do think that light skinned black and mulatto women are over represented in black media but there's no solid proof that magazines have the power to influence who black men date and marry. Skin color does not determine physical attractiveness in the black community, its about facial features, and strong african features are considered less feminine in our soceity. Sadly, black women who don't conform to the white ideal are regarded as afrocentric, separatist etc.
Probably a combination of skin color, hair texture, and features determines attractiveness, but less so today than in times past. Often light skin (a relative concept) will trump dark skin when everything else is equal, but not always. Naturally, in today's world voicing a preference for, say, Alicia Keys over India Airie is very un-PC, but many men still feel this way.
Finally I'm puzzled by the last sentence. How would a black woman who doesn't conform to the white ideal in looks be seen as Afrocentric or separatist? These things are ways of thinking or mindsets that are independent of looks.
Black solidarity made embracing sub-Saharan African phenotypes a talking point, not a practice. Which is why in 2008, we still have clearly mixed-looking women as the standard bearers of AA beauty, and colorism running rampant within the black community. The ODR is a contradiction to many tenants within the black power movement, but at the same time, beneficial to black solidarity.
I disagree. What the Black Power movement did is bring the undercurrent of resistance to colorism to the forefront. It has always been there but did not have cultural prominence. I'd challenge you to review 12 issues of Essence or Ebony (or more) and conclude that these magazines do not promote a diverse view of African American beauty - body size, skin color, features, hair texture, etc. From the letters to the editor from women around the world it is also clear that many African women, Carribean women, even Arabs and Latinas appreciate the diversity and feel included. These magazines, especially Essence, have been at the forefront of presenting a more balanced view of African American beauty.
Hanzou wrote:
Now we have this bizarre situation where "black is beautiful" is personified by a mixed woman like Halle Berry of Tyra Banks.
Hmmm. I think the only people, in my experience, who believe that are colorist Blacks and Mulatto advocates. When I have heard the phrase 'Black is beautiful' it has always been in the context of rejecting a colorist mentality and accepting Black people as they are rather than holding them to a set standard. Singularly beautiful A-A women are always exceptional - one can't say the same for the blonde ideal among Europeans and Latinos, where no-name blonde models proliferate in fashion magazines. Most Black American models actually did not and do not look like Tyra Banks at all. Beverly Johnson was the first Black American supermodel afterall, and she looks more like a Gabrielle Union type than a Tyra Banks type. Tyra Banks, incidentally, has always played second fiddle to Naomi Campbell in the modeling world because her look is more commercial. Plus both British and American models of SSA ancestry are pushed aside for more exotic African women like Iman and Alek - if you thumb through Vogue or Harper's you are more likely to see African models than you are A-A models period. This is the main reason Tyra casts so many "regular" A-A girls on America's Next Top Model - to show that SSA beauty is not exotic but also homegrown.
Hanzou wrote:
You just proved that there is a black monolith when it comes to political thought. Race is politics, so obviously when it comes to black politics, if you don't tow the party line, you're ostracized, beliittled, or worse.
A monolith implies that there is one way to be a Black American culturally speaking. If this was in fact true there would be no need to have the "cultural police" because there wouldn't be enough diversity to counteract. Obviously there is a segment within the A-A population who have anointed themselves as the cultural wardens, but even they cannot agree on what "being Black" is or means. This is just like the myth of a Great Black Leader that all A-As fall in line behind. Did Jesse Jackson win significant A-A majorities in '84 and '88? What about Al Sharpton?
Hanzou wrote:
For example, Obama was considered "not black enough" by many African American pundits early in the campaign, once he proved his "blackness", he received 90% of the black vote.
Same thing happened in Chicago. He was an outsider, not part of the A-A establishment and Democratic machine, so he was scrutinized by that establishment. But A-A pundits also ridiculed this notion, especially during his Senate race against the ridiculous Alan Keyes. His support arguably has more to do with the fact that he has shown that he can win "the White vote" - his support among A-A rose after his wins in Iowa and South Carolina.
Hanzou wrote:
Actually its an ideological sense of blackness. The ODR has eroded "black" into little more than that.
Then how can an ideological sense of blackness be "real" or "unreal" and why would phenotype determine how "black" a person is? I don't know if I believe that based on the argument you are making.
Hanzou wrote:
There aren't too many people with 2 black parents who look similar to someone with a black parent and a white parent. I'm sure you're well aware of that. I don't think I have to point out someone looking like Alicia Keys will be treated differently than someone looking like India Aerie do I?
LOL yes there are. Ancestry is not genetic admixture - Alicia Keys appears to have more European ancestry that Boris Kodjoe, yet both have a parent of majority European descent. And if I deduce that you mean that Alicia Keys might be viewed as more attractive that India.Arie, it would be fairer to make a comparison in treatment between equally attractive people, like Alicia Keys and Nona Gaye. If you mean to point out that, in a colorist society that prizes lighter skin would Rain Pryor be treated differently than India.Arie then I generally agree. But would someone step all over Alicia Keys to get to a more attractive darker skinned woman? You bet.
Hanzou wrote:
Absolutely. My point was/is that this mentality has trickled down to the modern day, and both "lightskinned blacks" and "darkskinned blacks" are guilty of perpetuating it. To bring it back to the original discussion, this mentality is exemplified by that cover on Ebony Magazine.
I am with Ty on this one - the issue is focused on modeling. There are no household names for A-A models bigger than Tyra and Kimora right now. Also Beverly Johnson, Bethann Hardison and Roshumba have all graced the pages and covers of Essence and other magazines when they were in their prime. Iman, Alek, and other African models are much more prevalent in the modeling world.
Like I said, look at some more covers and models portrayed within the issues before you make up your mind. Mary J. Blige, for example, seems to have at least 2 covers a year at Essence.
Hanzou wrote:
I do think that part of the reason my "proclamation" wasn't received well was because I then proceeded to consider myself "mulatto" and not black. So yes, its certainly how you say it.
LOL well the term is still controversial for some folks.
Because once again, Wek and Iman are not AA women, so it doesn't matter. The cover was made to communicate to AA standards of beauty because Ebony is targeted towards that demographic. Always has been, always will be.
Yeah it does matter, if they are on the cover. I believe the cover was made to communicate the AA idea of "black racial" beauty. As we all know, many AAs have a broad idea of the "black race" even though there is no evidence of it existing in the genetic sense. My point is, that a. there is no one "AA phenotype", and b. that AAs are racialists and have a broad idea of what "black" means. As AA's consider themselves part of the larger "black race", they think that there are many phenotypes included that they themselves do not have. This includes the phenotypes of non-americans and mixed americans. So, yes it does matter that Iman and Wek aren't american, because they're on a magazine that supposedly communicates a broad idea of "black racial" beauty.
It doesn't matter because AAs know that Iman and Wek aren't AAs, thus the fact that they are on the cover is a non-issue. However Banks and Kimora are known to be AAs or part of the AA community in some sense. Despite the fact that AAs have a broad idea of the black race's phenotype, the majority of AAs do not share the phenotype of Tyra Banks or Kimora Lee. Thus the cover perpetuates colorism because it showcases a standard of beauty that many AAs can't achieve.
Your points were never my argument in the first place. I never argued that there was one black phenotype, and I'm fully aware that black Americans believe that they come in a multitude of hues.
Quote:
So, you should be complaining about Wek and Iman as well, because the readers most likely look nothing like Wek and Iman. The fact that they're non-American does not mean it doesn't affect the AA standard of beauty. Many AA's don't believe in the line that separates AAs and Africans when it comes to "beauty" because of racialism. Regardless of their country of origin, they are seen as "black", thus the AA community "accepts" their phenotypes as being those other phenotypes of the "black race". Being non-American does not exclude WEk and Iman from the AA standard of "black racial" beauty. Being non-American does not mean Iman and Wek don't communicate to the reader a standard of beauty.
I disagree. Many AAs certainly do separate themselves from Africans, and vice versa. They may see each other as the same "race", but not the same people. Africans are viewed as immigrants, exotics, or whatever else, but they aren't readily embraced in AA communities as if they're long lost cousins of something.
I go back to this all the time, but which AA community are you talking about?
There are what I call the African Diasporic community who don't see themselves apart from other of African ancestry weither it be the bahamas, latin america or Africa. Their 'AA' identity is more concerned with African connection.
But their is no singular AA thought and community.
Part of that is purely physical appearance, since Africans in most cases, don't resemble AAs in most cases. Part of it is also cultural and linguistic. Thus when a woman looks at the Ebony cover, she'll see Wek and Iman and realize that both women don't represent her, her people, or her community. However Kimora and Tyra do.
Quote:
How would I have proof of what Tyra Banks is "aware of"?
Quote:
Because you said yourself: "tyra is clearly of mixed heritage." Prove to me that Tyra is of mixed ethnic heritage. Obviously, banks has genetic Euro admixture, but so do a crap load of other AAs. That does not necessarily mean that they have a mixed ethnic heritage.
I do believe that one of the definitions of "ethnic" is as follows;
Quote:
2 a: of or relating to large groups of people classed according to common racial, national, tribal, religious, linguistic, or cultural origin or background
Since you agree that Tyra has genetic Euro-African admixture, she is of mixed "ethnic" heritage.
In most western countries, the stereotypical sub-saharan phenotype is considered ugly, or even sub-human. It's "stereotypical" because people wrongly associate the wide nose/big lips look with all Africans. Alek Wek has this look, so it shouldn't come as a surprise that she hasn't recieved any beauty awards from the Black community.
In many non-western countries too: parts of Eastern Europe, East Asia, and as uncomfortable as this may be for some to recognize, parts of the Middle East and Africa (i.e., the Horn of Africa).
True, and and there are a lot of Asian ethnic groups that in my opinion have similar facial features with certain African ethnic groups.
Quote:
I do think that light skinned black and mulatto women are over represented in black media but there's no solid proof that magazines have the power to influence who black men date and marry. Skin color does not determine physical attractiveness in the black community, its about facial features, and strong african features are considered less feminine in our soceity. Sadly, black women who don't conform to the white ideal are regarded as afrocentric, separatist etc.
Probably a combination of skin color, hair texture, and features determines attractiveness, but less so today than in times past. Often light skin (a relative concept) will trump dark skin when everything else is equal, but not always. Naturally, in today's world voicing a preference for, say, Alicia Keys over India Airie is very un-PC, but many men still feel this way.
Finally I'm puzzled by the last sentence. How would a black woman who doesn't conform to the white ideal in looks be seen as Afrocentric or separatist? These things are ways of thinking or mindsets that are independent of looks.
'
FAQ
Search
Register
Log in
