While discussing the matter of contemporary African peoples "lightening" and bleaching their skin and the implications that holds Im wondering ...

What's the difference between Europeans tanning to become darker and Africans bleaching to become lighter?

We certainly don't hold such a stigma over tanning and never come to the conclusion that in doing so the "white" community is trying to be Black. Are we so ready to conclude that Black people want to become "White" by bleaching or is it still possible for a Black person to want a lighter complexion but not necessarily abandon their ethnicity?

What is it that makes a lateral cosmetic fashion trend an appealing and encouraged practice on their behalf and signification of a deep rooted global self esteem problem on ours?

It seems to me the major concern would be health consciousness but even there the door swings both ways- overexposure to the sun can be damaging nonetheless we dont necessarily consider "white" people pawns in the game for taking part.


tell me what you think (that probably means you Nah)


K

why would you want to be "lighter."
I don't really regard it as a "race-identity complex", but more of a self-esteem personal issue.
Why would anybody want to make their skin darker/ or lighter.
That implies that you are not happy with the way you look.
(okay,.....I can see you debunking this,....so let me hit ya one more time).

People, too often, are pre-occupied with their looks, and thus, spend hours of productive time changing ther looks.
This whole time, they don't realize that they will never be satisfied with themselves because they're basing their looks on somebody elses.
People can not just accept who and what they are,....no......they have to "change" their features to fit the mold of whatever they find to be "the look."

"I'm not the same guy you met yesturday. Well, I mean, atleast by tomorrow I won't be anyway."- Quasimoto

"I if speak at one constant volume....at one constant pitch.....at one constant rythm...right into your ear, you still won't hear"- Mike Patton

But now the question goes beyond its implications into Black fashion and complexion concern.

The question is- are we willing to prescribe such hefty judgements when "whites" do the same ish at a much larger rate?

Would you condemn any person of tanning- and not just getting brown in the sun but actually tanning- as necessarily insecure? Do you look at pale people and say think to yourself they need to get sun? is there something wrong with that?

As for the general human condition- seeing as insecurity is a natural state for human emotion I certainly hope you're not suggesting a standard manner in which people should cope with their insecurity. My point is- if it's ok for "whites" to sit on the beach and soak up browness at risk of skin cancer then why is not ok for Black people to do the same in the revers?

Im playing devil's advocate really now- some people still think Im trying to say light right is right and thats not the case- my question is , is there something wrong with it?

K

I feel you... the double-standard argument is a brilliant way to start this discussion.

The perfect follow up is that there are psycho-social implications to the lightening of one's skin based on beauty myths.

And the not-so-perfect d-Best contribution is:

Realize that for "white" people (not ethnically speaking, but people sans melanin)

Being the color pale IS unhealthy. Not having skin pigment and melanin abundancies is dangerous, and hazardous to the health. Light tanning is good for light people. Too much, too soon is skin cancerous. That's what evolution is for.

But these northern-European cats without color need to tan. Not only cause dark is mad hot (the blacker the berry...) but because it's not healthy for them to remain pale.

Have you ever checked some white cats? You can see their veins, and some cell action through their skin--it's quite gross.



So in conclusion, for beautiful dark-skinned women to bleah--it is their call, but it's not what's up. It has it's roots in subconsciously bought beauty myths, and it isn't healthy to put that shit on your skin.

For light people to tan is an intelligent health move.


Response?

"White" people shouldnt be happy to be pale- Black people should be happy to be dark.

If we are to excuse the notion that anyone should not be happy with the way "god intended" or provided then we have to start at square one at prescribing the same thing for ourselves.

If you dont think letting your veins show is sightly then any Black person should have the same right to think their skin is too dark.


double edged sword y'all we cant have it both ways

your comparing a natural reaction, to an unnatural process... think about it... Being white I can tell you that tanning doesnt always require laying in the sun or on a tanning bed... just from driving, walkin or any outside activity will result in me taning some what...the same is true for most folks of all races... now that orange "fake-bake" body builder cream shit is mad gross...skin bleaching is bullshit... it doesnt work too well and it is not safe alot of the facts presented on the subject are false, it's like that cream that gets rid of celluite... it don't work...

having a slight tan can actually be heathier, the sun helps to clean up your skin, and helps your body to process vitamin D (which prevents depression) and Calicium (good for strong bones) allthough over exposure to the sun will lead to skin cancer in allmost all white people(and some light skined folks too) lightly tanned skin is healthier than pale whit skin, it is actually better for us white folks to get some sun... the whole bleaching thing isnt good for anyone!

A "white" person uses tanning salon or excessive sun tanning to acheive darker skin are they beyond the bounds of normalcy?

In the converse is a Black person with a medium complexion reasonably entitled to stay out of the sun to avoid getting darker?

K

again it is apples and oranges, skin bleaching is not FDA apporved, so I have no idea how dangerous it is...accesive tanning will cause skin cancer in most "white" people, it is not "normal" but it is the body's NATURAL reaction to sunlight... taning creams, or lightening creams are not natural... and lightening pill are just plain dangerous!

I beg you to show me how a bed of UV lights turned on "Fry" for twenty minutes is any more natural than a pill?

and beyond that- what about staying out of the sun to keep from being darker- is that ok?

>I beg you to show me
>how a bed of UV
>lights turned on "Fry" for
>twenty minutes is any more
>natural than a pill?
>
>oh they aren't, you miss understood... I was taking about sun bathing(which doing for long periods of cun can be just as bad as the beds) the maijor difference is that one is internal and the other is external... so, the question is if th pill gives you liver cancer, is that as bad as skin cancer from the beds?...tanning can definitely mean that some of the poeple who do it want to be black, but there are benifits to it in moderation!
and stayin out of the sun to keep from getting darker, that just sounds weird... I mean the higher the level of melananananin(sorry I tend to stutter ) the harder it is to "tan" from the sun... so that would be a psychological problem... perhaps that means they want to be lighter to attain some sort of satus...or for fashion but I mean once your a certain complexion there aint a whole lot not goin to the beach is do to make you lighter...besides people should just accept them selves for what complexion god gave them,

The man can at least avoid getting darker- which is a possibility for most people that might be considered dark much less any brown skinned person.

as far as this...

"besides people should just accept them selves for what complexion god gave them, "

then that means pale people should stay that way

but you have to admit, staying pale is kind of hard, I mean cutting the grass, walking in the park, driving to work, will all make you alittle less pale...unless you either become a vampire, shut in, coal miner, or gob on tuns of sun block! pale people should worry about catching a tan anymore than dark skin folks should! I mean the same thing with hair, in the winter my hair looks brown, in summer it turns blonde, or; my hair is mad curly... people tell me to straighten it, or ask how they can get there hair like mine... I dont dye my hair, I dont perm it, relax it... I just wash and wear it... people should never worship the sun, or some eurocentric idology of complexion a little sun aint gonna kill nobody! its natural

I know too many European Americans that can sit in the sun all day and still be pale- but you said that they should be happy with the complexion that God gave them.

Doesnt that mean you should be? You already admitted that you tanned.

true I have tanned, at the beach, where the primary function was to enjoy the ocean...swimmin, and general aquatic horse play... if you dont tann, you'll burn, and then it aint fun to be outside, I aint tanning in the winter, on a bed or with magic creams... Like a siad before it is dangerous to burn, so I tan to try to avoid the burn, and to enjoy the ocean...waves, sun, sea, etc. the sun has been linked to eliviating depression, fatigue and a host of other illnesses! The fact that the sun clears up my skin is backed by science, people with chicken pox or psiarisis often will be recomended to go outside and let the sun heal them...but I aint takin no pill!

It seems fair to me that people be content with what God gave them- as you said.

what is not so even is the notion that "whites" can tan excessivly- far beyond the moderation that you suggest and not at all be considered the racial pawns that is the suggested mindset of Blacks who lighten or even those who purposefully stay out of the sun.

STOP!

"Have you ever checked some white cats? You can see their veins, and some cell action through their skin--it's quite gross."

Bwwhhhaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!What the hell does cell action look like?

My grandma was translucent--all that scottish blood, we are as pale as fuck....

Anybody that is willing to mutate their appearance in exchange for their health has got some issues--no matter what colour you are shooting for...

Granted I cover my self with tattoos, so I suppose I'm not even fit to comment???

Carry on

“Your body is not a temple, it’s an amusement park. Enjoy the ride.” Anthony Bourdain

> Light tanning is good for light people.

Being melanin-ly challenged myself, I can attest to the fact that 15 minutes per week in a tan session helps maintain my skin and keeps a healthy color in my cheeks.
I am so pale I look and feel sickly if I don't get some sun.
So why do I live in Seattle.... uhhhhh.....??


Dove
~Sheepish Lordess of Chaos~


"One day all them bags gon' get in your way..." Erykah

"You can't talk your way out of problems you behave yourself into" ~ S. Covey

Email: Tygereyz67@aol.com
Wanna paaaaaage me? Email up to 200 characters: Dove@myairmail.com

http://UrbLife.com
http://twitter.com/FlyLikeDove
http://instagram.com/FlyLikeDove
http://Facebook.com/FlyLikeDove
http://flylikedove.contently.com

Take some lightner in small doses to just be a little more mocha? Does that signify that Im not happy with my skin color in any sense less than Dove's brief tanning?


K

but you can only go so far.

at least that is how it has been explained to me. Must be why buffy and tiffany jock me.

k. orr

http://breddanansi.tumblr.com/

but damn koala..we was thinkin alike...

cause i was just gonna ask if someone could make something to just permanently make these fake ass orange tannin' bitches DARK....ugh..they annoy the fuck outta me...


Much love,
Kyle

Surgeon General- DPS...drunk posters society...y'all ain't ready!?!? We soldiers...don't be scurrrrrred

vinyl junkies/cd confitionados...go here
http://www.recordkingdom.com

"i always tell people that fame is
nothing but a good publicist, while
talent is a genuine article..." ~ Pozi

much love,
Kyle

Detroit..Let's GO!!! May 12th Dilla Walk for Lupus...Belle Isle...

http://walk.lupusresearch.org/goto/blackeyedskeez

Even a Dollar can HELP..


http://www.myspace.com/jedikyle
http://www.detroitderbygirls.com/

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
I know of some girls who died from taking those tanning pills.



Witty as can be , but not for sale . RUN DMC

Money is the key to end all your woes/ your ups and downs , your highs and your lows / Won't you tell the last time that love bought your clothes / It's like that and that's the way it is. HUH!!! RUN DMC

you talkin bout the ones that use the lotions & oils to make themselves look like orange aliens?? That is so gross!

Dove
~Sheepish Lordess of Chaos~


"One day all them bags gon' get in your way..." Erykah

"You can't talk your way out of problems you behave yourself into" ~ S. Covey

Email: Tygereyz67@aol.com
Wanna paaaaaage me? Email up to 200 characters: Dove@myairmail.com

http://UrbLife.com
http://twitter.com/FlyLikeDove
http://instagram.com/FlyLikeDove
http://Facebook.com/FlyLikeDove
http://flylikedove.contently.com

That shit cracks me up- especially when they wear white and green

There's a difference in the power dynamic surrounding these practices. Africans lightnening their skin is a result of Eurocentric thought imposed by colonialism and a culturally dominated world market.

Europeans wanting to be "darker" carries a different (although related) historical weight. They want to be "tan" but not TOO dark ... just dark enough to capitalize on racist fantasies of dark=wild. Yet, as dark as they get, they will never be mistaken for black. They know that they can be "exotic" yet still white in the end.

African people trying to make themselves lighter with dangerous chemicals speaks to a kind of desperation to achieve what they've been told since the first encounters with white people: to be white(r) is to be more civilized, more wealthy, closer to god, more beautiful, etc.

Just my $0.02

love and respect,
El Rey


http://www.mumia2000.org
http://www.mumia.org

Sure it's old news, but it can never be said enough:

""Dundee" was originally used to refer to the texture of certain fabrics. If an article was made of vintage leather, raw denim, canvas, hemp, rough linen or cotton, it had the potential to be classified as some "Dundee" or rugged shit. It comes from Crocodile Dundee but it ain't got nuffin' to do with Paul Hoagan. It's more about a lifestyle now. It's about doing what you gotta do to survive in the wilderness. It's about the balance between total control and wreckless abandon. The Dundee approach to life is adventure. It's about taming this beast of a world and the apparel needed to do so." - Black Thought

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
who are you









really

word up

>African people trying to make themselves
>lighter with dangerous chemicals speaks
>to a kind of desperation
>to achieve what they've been
>told since the first encounters
>with white people: to be
>white(r) is to be more
>civilized, more wealthy, closer to
>god, more beautiful, etc.

but I still insist that these ideas were the fashion of Egypt long before this- especially as far as being closer to God!? dont get me stared.

K

Koala, there is a problem with someone who would risk skin cancer to be tan. There is a problem with someone who would use bleaching cream which also has its health risks. It's DANGEROUS. And it's a symptom of the preoccupation of people with wanting to be "beautiful", whatever that may mean.

I don't know about what youre talking about with the Egyptians, but being as Africans are a diverse people,appearance wise as well as culturally, I assume that whatever they were doing would not be the same as what other ethnic groups in that vast continent.

http://www.funkknots.com look at the wonderful art! No it ain't mine! Just go there!Support your fellow player, ffunkknots

"Let them have their toy, we've got books."
Bill Cosby's response to Tavis Smiley of "BET Tonight "regarding the lack of minorities on television."

"Multiculturalism is a white people joke. Black people have always been here as different. People need to stop saying that there is one way to be--and then the issue will disappear." Ntozake Shange-interview in _Mother_ _Jones_

My point with the egyptians - is only to show that Black people dont need "white" influence to think this way and I dont want to allow the idea that if not for their actions we would never think such things much less take advantage of each other.

If anything the condition of lightening is not so much to acheive "whiteness" but to escape Blackness- you cant necessarily resolve that by accusing racial oppression cuz there is also a large contingency of light skinned Blacks that played right along with colonialism and the privelege of being light skinned (see the Octaroon communities of the early south and the isalnd of Goree and it authorities) and civilizations that preceded it by centuries.

Otherwise- My intention here was to play more devil's advocate. I think you're right on point with your statement but what does it have to offer people who use these products reasonable- those who dont risk skin cancer on either side of the issue?

If a dark skinned man avoids the sun to avoid getting darker- is this indicative of manipulative racial oppression or excusable activity similar to what is considered reasonable among "white" people?

Where is the line drawn between beauty consciousness and racially motivated self depracation?

Are we intimating that we shouldnt be beauty conscious at all?

K

>My point with the egyptians -
>is only to show that
>Black people dont need "white"
>influence to think this way
>and I dont want to
>allow the idea that if
>not for their actions we
>would never think such things
>much less take advantage of
>each other.

I'm assuming that since this seems to be a more recent phenomenon,you can make a very strong case for skin bleaching as being one of the many consequences of colonialism.


>If anything the condition of lightening
>is not so much to
>acheive "whiteness" but to escape
>Blackness- you cant necessarily resolve
>that by accusing racial oppression
>cuz there is also a
>large contingency of light skinned
>Blacks that played right along
>with colonialism and the privelege
>of being light skinned (see
>the Octaroon communities of the
>early south and the isalnd
>of Goree and it authorities)
>and civilizations that preceded it
>by centuries.

Yes, definitely. Unfortunately, colorism found its way into the class system and the systems of social status.

>Otherwise- My intention here was to
>play more devil's advocate. I
>think you're right on point
>with your statement but what
>does it have to offer
>people who use these products
>reasonable- those who dont risk
>skin cancer on either side
>of the issue?
>
>If a dark skinned man avoids
>the sun to avoid getting
>darker- is this indicative of
>manipulative racial oppression or excusable
>activity similar to what is
>considered reasonable among "white" people?

You know, you can't really answer that question. There are no real right/wrong answers. I would say, see what that man also does, how he acts, what he says in regard to skin color. If he SIMPLY thinks he's cuter without being darker...then that's him. My initial reaction to someone doing that would probably not be that this is a non-socially influenced decision.

>Where is the line drawn between
>beauty consciousness and racially motivated
>self depracation?

What is beaut ?

>Are we intimating that we shouldnt
>be beauty conscious at all?

I don't think that "beauty" is that necessary of a concept as we make it out to be. I save a whole lot of time not worrying about being cute if I don't want to (which is most of the time).

http://www.funkknots.com look at the wonderful art! No it ain't mine! Just go there!Support your fellow player, ffunkknots

"Let them have their toy, we've got books."
Bill Cosby's response to Tavis Smiley of "BET Tonight "regarding the lack of minorities on television."

"Multiculturalism is a white people joke. Black people have always been here as different. People need to stop saying that there is one way to be--and then the issue will disappear." Ntozake Shange-interview in _Mother_ _Jones_

>I'm assuming that since this seems
>to be a more recent
>phenomenon,you can make a very
>strong case for skin bleaching
>as being one of the
>many consequences of colonialism.

My problem is this is more a derivative of the worldwide fashion industry which has its roots in European culture as suggested by Greece and Rome- both those cultures dealt largely from the Egyptian deck.

but all this is for the other post.

>I don't think that "beauty" is
>that necessary of a concept
>as we make it out
>to be. I save a
>whole lot of time not
>worrying about being cute if
>I don't want to (which
>is most of the time).

I disagree- I think beauty at lest the general concept is something necessary for human life and social interactiom. I would also suggest that all that time you spend not being cute- is just as much time you're devoting to demonstrating beauty.

The confusing thing about this whole issue is the suggestion that dark skin women should be accepted into the realm of Euro fashion and leisure and popoular beauty ideals but we have yet to determine whether or not those arenas are actually worth the trouble.

Should a dark sister be dismayed that there are no dark women in Vogue- hell no- fuck Vogue.

K

>My problem is this is more
>a derivative of the worldwide
>fashion industry which has its
>roots in European culture as
>suggested by Greece and Rome-
>both those cultures dealt largely
>from the Egyptian deck.

Of course, without colonialism, it seems to me that there would be no reason to CARE about European ideals of beauty in the first place if you weren't interested in Europe. Also, if Egyptians came up with much of the concepts we use in the fashion industry today, what would that matter to a group that is culturally different like the Yoruba?

>but all this is for the
>other post.
>
>>I don't think that "beauty" is
>>that necessary of a concept
>>as we make it out
>>to be. I save a
>>whole lot of time not
>>worrying about being cute if
>>I don't want to (which
>>is most of the time).
>
>I disagree- I think beauty at
>lest the general concept is
>something necessary for human life
>and social interactiom. I would
>also suggest that all that
>time you spend not being
>cute- is just as much
>time you're devoting to demonstrating
>beauty.

I'm just laz . I can see what youre saying, but I can also see that beauty as a social institution with defined boundaries of who is/ain't in that privileges certain people on a large scale as a problem.

>The confusing thing about this whole
>issue is the suggestion that
>dark skin women should be
>accepted into the realm of
>Euro fashion and leisure and
>popoular beauty ideals but we
>have yet to determine whether
>or not those arenas are
>actually worth the trouble.

As we grow into a more worldwide community, we are incorporating various cultures into our own. We are being influenced by a wider variety of ideas...and the people who are in power's ideas have the most influence. (Of course, groups with the most power don't necessarily distribute that power equally)

>Should a dark sister be dismayed
>that there are no dark
>women in Vogue- hell no-
>fuck Vogue.

No, she shouldn't...but shouldn't is different from won't. Not seeing "positive" images of yourself (depending on your pov) can damage a person's self-esteem. Of course, some people will be like "eff Vogue"...but others won't. And it would behoove us all as people to eliminate the social institution of beauty.

http://www.funkknots.com look at the wonderful art! No it ain't mine! Just go there!Support your fellow player, ffunkknots

"Let them have their toy, we've got books."
Bill Cosby's response to Tavis Smiley of "BET Tonight "regarding the lack of minorities on television."

"Multiculturalism is a white people joke. Black people have always been here as different. People need to stop saying that there is one way to be--and then the issue will disappear." Ntozake Shange-interview in _Mother_ _Jones_

>Of course, without colonialism, it seems
>to me that there would
>be no reason to CARE
>about European ideals of beauty
>in the first place if
>you weren't interested in Europe.

>Also, if Egyptians came up
>with much of the concepts
>we use in the fashion
>industry today, what would that
>matter to a group that
>is culturally different like the
>Yoruba?

You need to go to There is a Light post and read these issues there- to be brief Egypt was the cosmopolitan nation that demonstrated your idea of the "worldwide community" given ample evidence of their traditions it is easy to show that the ideals of "beauty"- as we come to know it regarding leisure would have still favor light skinned women. The ideologies of Egypt might have mattered to Yoruba peoples as Egypt represented a great number of cultures and might have held the Yoruba people in high esteem due to their dark complexion. Today the fashion industry still draws from Greece and Rome which of course drew from Egypt the point is not to throw the baby out with the bath watre- but to harken back to an earlier society - Egypt - that held a variety of regard and significance for a variety of complexions.

Let's not just blame the impression made by European culture and whatever effects we suppose it has on black people- let's look to see where the Europeans got it from and we might find the stuff that they forgot.

>>Should a dark sister be dismayed
>>that there are no dark
>>women in Vogue- hell no-
>>fuck Vogue.
>
>No, she shouldn't...but shouldn't is different
>from won't. Not seeing "positive"
>images of yourself (depending on
>your pov) can damage a
>person's self-esteem. Of course, some
>people will be like "eff
>Vogue"...but others won't. And it
>would behoove us all as
>people to eliminate the social
>institution of beauty.

This is where I SERIOUSLY disagree. Not seeing "positive" images very much depends on where you are looking. If there are a great number of dark skinned mothers, dark skinned doctors, dark skinned teachers, etc- I detest the idea that it all amounts to nothing until we get them on the cover of a magazine- or sitcom.

The institution of beauty is what it is- I dont see the point in trying to change it or eliminate it in the vain attempt that it will resolve the natural insecurity of human kind. Should we eliminate all beautiful people for the sake of people who dont feel as attractive? Would it behoove people who pride themselves in their beauty to diminish the ideas that make them beautiful- who do you suggest we prohibit those ideas?


K

>
>>Of course, without colonialism, it seems
>>to me that there would
>>be no reason to CARE
>>about European ideals of beauty
>>in the first place if
>>you weren't interested in Europe.
>
>>Also, if Egyptians came up
>>with much of the concepts
>>we use in the fashion
>>industry today, what would that
>>matter to a group that
>>is culturally different like the
>>Yoruba?
>
>You need to go to There
>is a Light post and
>read these issues there- to
>be brief Egypt was the
>cosmopolitan nation that demonstrated your
>idea of the "worldwide community"
>given ample evidence of their
>traditions it is easy to
>show that the ideals of
>"beauty"- as we come to
>know it regarding leisure would
>have still favor light skinned
>women. The ideologies of Egypt
>might have mattered to Yoruba
>peoples as Egypt represented a
>great number of cultures and
>might have held the Yoruba
>people in high esteem due
>to their dark complexion. Today
>the fashion industry still draws
>from Greece and Rome which
>of course drew from Egypt
>the point is not to
>throw the baby out with
>the bath watre- but to
>harken back to an earlier
>society - Egypt - that
>held a variety of regard
>and significance for a variety
>of complexions.


I'm not sure which time period you're talking about in Egypt...but before Columbus, in the trans saharan slave trade, a heavy Arabic influence became part of Egypt,as more Arabs moved into Egypt and did enslave Africans from other parts of the continent and from Europe, too. The women who closest fit the Arabic standard of beauty were the most prized..naturally, that standard of beauty was of people who looked most like them.

>Let's not just blame the impression
>made by European culture and
>whatever effects we suppose it
>has on black people- let's
>look to see where the
>Europeans got it from and
>we might find the stuff
>that they forgot.
>
>>>Should a dark sister be dismayed
>>>that there are no dark
>>>women in Vogue- hell no-
>>>fuck Vogue.
>>
>>No, she shouldn't...but shouldn't is different
>>from won't. Not seeing "positive"
>>images of yourself (depending on
>>your pov) can damage a
>>person's self-esteem. Of course, some
>>people will be like "eff
>>Vogue"...but others won't. And it
>>would behoove us all as
>>people to eliminate the social
>>institution of beauty.
>
>This is where I SERIOUSLY disagree.
>Not seeing "positive" images very
>much depends on where you
>are looking. If there are
>a great number of dark
>skinned mothers, dark skinned doctors,
>dark skinned teachers, etc- I
>detest the idea that it
>all amounts to nothing until
>we get them on the
>cover of a magazine- or
>sitcom.

It doesn't all amount to nothing, but it does amount to SOMETHING. Beauty, though it does affect what jobs you get, really has its greatest impact in the social sphere, in my opinion. You can be an esteemed actress like Whoopi Goldberg and STILL have people saying you are ugly because of your skin and your features. It won't affect everyone equally, because we're all different. What's water off one duck's back is cripping to another.

>The institution of beauty is what
>it is- I dont see
>the point in trying to
>change it or eliminate it
>in the vain attempt that
>it will resolve the natural
>insecurity of human kind. Should
>we eliminate all beautiful people
>for the sake of people
>who dont feel as attractive?
>Would it behoove people who
>pride themselves in their beauty
>to diminish the ideas that
>make them beautiful- who do
>you suggest we prohibit those
>ideas?

You're going a bit too far there. I'm saying, the institution of beauty should be eliminated because it is not very inclusive. The elimination of it wouldn't solve insecurity, however, it would be a weight off of those people who are hindered by society's ideals of what's beautiful and what ain't.

And honestly, do people REALLY think that they can REALLY get rid of racism and sexism? I think most people would think not. But should we try anyway? Yes. Why? Because it is a hindrance to all of us. Why? Because it dwarfs potential. Same goes with the institution of beauty.

We shouldn't go around killing people. I'm not an advocate of prohibition, you can't MAKE people do anything.



"You might as well pay attention/ you can't afford free speech" -George Clinton

http://www.funkknots.com look at the wonderful art! No it ain't mine! Just go there!Support your fellow player, ffunkknots

"Let them have their toy, we've got books."
Bill Cosby's response to Tavis Smiley of "BET Tonight "regarding the lack of minorities on television."

"Multiculturalism is a white people joke. Black people have always been here as different. People need to stop saying that there is one way to be--and then the issue will disappear." Ntozake Shange-interview in _Mother_ _Jones_

>I'm not sure which time period
>you're talking about in Egypt...but
>before Columbus, in the trans
>saharan slave trade, a heavy
>Arabic influence became part of
>Egypt,as more Arabs moved into
>Egypt and did enslave Africans
>from other parts of the
>continent and from Europe, too.
> The women who
>closest fit the Arabic standard
>of beauty were the most
>prized..naturally, that standard of beauty
>was of people who looked
>most like them.

My point is this is a tendency when color variance is as apparent. it stands to demonstrate that the colorism condition is likely to occur in any community where there is color variance not necessarily that it is due to colonialism and racism.

The standard preceding the Arabic influence was that women who stayed indoors were the most revered and this is more directly attributed to paternal pathology which suggested men should hold positions of power, prestige, and labor- while women should stay indoors and achieve notions of leisure and beauty.

>It doesn't all amount to nothing,
>but it does amount to
>SOMETHING. Beauty, though it does
>affect what jobs you get,
>really has its greatest impact
>in the social sphere, in
>my opinion. You can be
>an esteemed actress like Whoopi
>Goldberg and STILL have people
>saying you are ugly because
>of your skin and your
>features. It won't affect everyone
>equally, because we're all different.
>What's water off one duck's
>back is cripping to another.

So should we ingratiate the honor, strength and pride that is also the colloquial context of dark skinned people or destroy the idea that claims that light skinned people are prettier? Do we tell people to stop thinking this way or do we tell people that they'll have to deal with it because people will think this way regardless?

Im not pretty- and i dont want to be pretty- certainly not by those standards; so should I insist that we change the standards?

>You're going a bit too far
>there. I'm saying, the institution
>of beauty should be eliminated
>because it is not very
>inclusive.

I dont think its fair to insist that all things be inclusive- its certainly not the natural order of things. How do you suggest that someone eliminate something that is very profitable for them on the grounds that its not so fair to you or in this case hardly involves you. It seems to me youd be better off telling the people not to be involved with the institution rather than trying to bring the insitution down.

>The elimination of it
>wouldn't solve insecurity, however, it
>would be a weight off
>of those people who are
>hindered by society's ideals of
>what's beautiful and what ain't.

If those are society's ideals then the institution is perfectly reasonable in pandering to it. Should the Hip Hop industry cater to a more multicultural audience- it would certainly be a weight of all those "white" people who are trying to fit in.

K

because I don't have time to respond to the rest of what you said...though believe me I can...
>So should we ingratiate the honor,
>strength and pride that is
>also the colloquial context of
>dark skinned people or destroy
>the idea that claims that
>light skinned people are prettier?

Neither. We should acknowledge that there is beauty in all hues. Otherwise we'd just be making up yet another beauty hierarchy.

>Do we tell people to
>stop thinking this way or
>do we tell people that
>they'll have to deal with
>it because people will think
>this way regardless?

We try to get people to stop thinking inside the box. We can't make anyone do anything.

>Im not pretty- and i dont
>want to be pretty- certainly
>not by those standards; so
>should I insist that we
>change the standards?

That's a very self centered view. Just because it won't directly affect you doesn't mean you shouldn't advocate it.

>>You're going a bit too far
>>there. I'm saying, the institution
>>of beauty should be eliminated
>>because it is not very
>>inclusive.
>
>I dont think its fair to
>insist that all things be
>inclusive- its certainly not the
>natural order of things. How
>do you suggest that someone
>eliminate something that is very
>profitable for them on the
>grounds that its not so
>fair to you or in
>this case hardly involves you.

That's why racism and sexism still exist in a BIG way. Because they benefit somebody...a lot of somebodies.

>It seems to me youd
>be better off telling the
>people not to be involved
>with the institution rather than
>trying to bring the insitution
>down.

??? If people weren't involved with the institution, there wouldnt be one.

>>The elimination of it
>>wouldn't solve insecurity, however, it
>>would be a weight off
>>of those people who are
>>hindered by society's ideals of
>>what's beautiful and what ain't.
>
>If those are society's ideals then
>the institution is perfectly reasonable
>in pandering to it. Should
>the Hip Hop industry cater
>to a more multicultural audience-
>it would certainly be a
>weight of all those "white"
>people who are trying to
>fit in.

Actually, society's ideals are generally reflections of the most powerful people in society. They have the resources to coerce people into believing what they think is the truth. Hip hop obviously is working fine with a multicultural audience...without a large amount of white people BUYING hiphop, many of our favorite and least favorite artists would need to get a PAYING job.

"You might as well pay attention/ you can't afford free speech" -George Clinton

http://www.funkknots.com look at the wonderful art! No it ain't mine! Just go there!Support your fellow player, ffunkknots

"Let them have their toy, we've got books."
Bill Cosby's response to Tavis Smiley of "BET Tonight "regarding the lack of minorities on television."

"Multiculturalism is a white people joke. Black people have always been here as different. People need to stop saying that there is one way to be--and then the issue will disappear." Ntozake Shange-interview in _Mother_ _Jones_

>Neither. We should acknowledge that there
>is beauty in all hues.
>Otherwise we'd just be making
>up yet another beauty hierarchy.

Are you suggesting everybody in the world should think this way or just all the Black people?

>>Do we tell people to
>>stop thinking this way or
>>do we tell people that
>>they'll have to deal with
>>it because people will think
>>this way regardless?
>
>We try to get people to
>stop thinking inside the box.
>We can't make anyone do
>anything.

So what if some people decide to remain in the box- and you know they will; should we take further steps to keep them from hurting people's feelings?

>>Im not pretty- and i dont
>>want to be pretty- certainly
>>not by those standards; so
>>should I insist that we
>>change the standards?
>
>That's a very self centered view.
>Just because it won't directly
>affect you doesn't mean you
>shouldn't advocate it.

Thats not self-centered at all in fact it references "those standards" and denies them. It doesnt affect me cuz I dont put much faith in the standards to begin with- I dont advocate striking them down because its vain attempt at changing how people think by changing what they should have they freedom to see or show.

>>I dont think its fair to
>>insist that all things be
>>inclusive- its certainly not the
>>natural order of things. How
>>do you suggest that someone
>>eliminate something that is very
>>profitable for them on the
>>grounds that its not so
>>fair to you or in
>>this case hardly involves you.
>
>That's why racism and sexism still
>exist in a BIG way.
> Because they benefit somebody...a
>lot of somebodies.

That is also why Hip Hop is successful- or even FUBU. should we not allow such things?

>>It seems to me youd
>>be better off telling the
>>people not to be involved
>>with the institution rather than
>>trying to bring the insitution
>>down.
>
>??? If people weren't involved with
>the institution, there wouldnt be
>one.

I mean telling YOUR people- you already admit that you cant make anybody do anything. So why set your people up for changing something that may never change instead of toughening them up to the way it is? Is elminating the Beauty industry feasible- and is it possible that nothing would spring up in its place?

>>If those are society's ideals then
>>the institution is perfectly reasonable
>>in pandering to it. Should
>>the Hip Hop industry cater
>>to a more multicultural audience-
>>it would certainly be a
>>weight of all those "white"
>>people who are trying to
>>fit in.
>
>Actually, society's ideals are generally reflections
>of the most powerful people
>in society.

sure according to the powerful people.

>They have the
>resources to coerce people into
>believing what they think is
>the truth. Hip hop obviously
>is working fine with a
>multicultural audience...without a large
>amount of white people BUYING
>hiphop, many of our favorite
>and least favorite artists would
>need to get a PAYING
>job.

Nevertheless it is a cultue where black men have dominance- should we make way for more caucasian rappers? Or are we ready to admit that somethings are not intended to be generally inclusive?

>Are you suggesting everybody in the
>world should think this way
>or just all the Black
>people?
everyone. colorism exists all over the world.

>So what if some people decide
>to remain in the box-
>and you know they will;
>should we take further steps
>to keep them from hurting
>people's feelings?

yup.


>Thats not self-centered at all in
>fact it references "those standards"
>and denies them. It doesnt
>affect me cuz I dont
>put much faith in the
>standards to begin with- I
>dont advocate striking them down
>because its vain attempt at
>changing how people think by
>changing what they should have
>they freedom to see or
>show.

But it's all in reference to YOU. YOU deny them. Does everybody else? Why is it vain? Sometimes, revolutions do work.

>>That's why racism and sexism still
>>exist in a BIG way.
>> Because they benefit somebody...a
>>lot of somebodies.
>
That is also why Hip Hop
is successful- or even FUBU.
should we not allow such
things?

I'm a woman, and it pisses me off that hiphop can be so sexist at times. That's one of the reasons I'm not as interested in hiphop as I was when I knew less about it. We can allow anything, we just dont have to tolerate what it stands for.


>I mean telling YOUR people- you
>already admit that you cant
>make anybody do anything. So
>why set your people up
>for changing something that may
>never change instead of toughening
>them up to the way
>it is?

You try and do both. This isn't necessarily a question that is easily answered by an either/or type deal. At some point, people have to take responsibility for their own actions. BUT, there is no denying that society has a major impact in who people are and what they do. We are social creatures.

Is elminating the
>Beauty industry feasible- and is
>it possible that nothing would
>spring up in its place?

I'm not really talking about the industry...I'm talking about ideas. And some ideas of beauty are probably biologically informed...but I can't really speak about that because I am not too scientifically incline .


>
>sure according to the powerful people.

Uh...no. Think about it. I have a book with a list of, I believe(and I'll check for you), the most powerful bodies in governmental interest. After you get through the countries...(this is still in the under 50 range, mind you)...you find a list of companies. Powerful peoples' interests DO affect much of our lives.

>>They have the
>>resources to coerce people into
>>believing what they think is
>>the truth. Hip hop obviously
>>is working fine with a
>>multicultural audience...without a large
>>amount of white people BUYING
>>hiphop, many of our favorite
>>and least favorite artists would
>>need to get a PAYING
>>job.
>
>Nevertheless it is a cultue where
>black men have dominance- should
>we make way for more
>caucasian rappers? Or are we
>ready to admit that somethings
>are not intended to be
>generally inclusive?

Yes, somethings are not meant to be generally inclusive. But at the same time, somethings could be MORE inclusive. Would you tell me that the world of work is not meant to be inclusive, and that is why I can expect to make 75 cents to every dollar a man makes? And that I should learn to deal with that? If I don't have to deal with something, I don't want to.


"You might as well pay attention/ you can't afford free speech" -George Clinton

http://www.funkknots.com look at the wonderful art! No it ain't mine! Just go there!Support your fellow player, ffunkknots

"Let them have their toy, we've got books."
Bill Cosby's response to Tavis Smiley of "BET Tonight "regarding the lack of minorities on television."

"Multiculturalism is a white people joke. Black people have always been here as different. People need to stop saying that there is one way to be--and then the issue will disappear." Ntozake Shange-interview in _Mother_ _Jones_

>>Thats not self-centered at all in
>>fact it references "those standards"
>>and denies them. It doesnt
>>affect me cuz I dont
>>put much faith in the
>>standards to begin with- I
>>dont advocate striking them down
>>because its vain attempt at
>>changing how people think by
>>changing what they should have
>>they freedom to see or
>>show.
>
>But it's all in reference to
>YOU. YOU deny them. Does
>everybody else? Why is it
>vain? Sometimes, revolutions do work.

You already admitted that you cant make people do anything- you certainly cant expect everybody to think the way you do- as you say that would be self-centered. So how come you're allowed to be self centered but no one else is? Is it because your self-centeredness is inclusive, well it certainly wouldnt include people with a preference.

>I'm not really talking about the
>industry...I'm talking about ideas. And
>some ideas of beauty are
>probably biologically informed...but I can't
>really speak about that because
>I am not too scientifically
>incline .

How do you suggest we change people's ideas- furthermore dont you think thats being self-centered? Telling people they are not entitled to formulate their own ideas- especially if they are at someone else's expense?

>>sure according to the powerful people.
>
>Uh...no. Think about it. I have
>a book with a list
>of, I believe(and I'll check
>for you), the most powerful
>bodies in governmental interest. After
>you get through the countries...(this
>is still in the under
>50 range, mind you)...you find
>a list of companies. Powerful
>peoples' interests DO affect much
>of our lives.

Do YOU think "white" women are the most beautiful specimens on the planet- of course you dont. So how much power do all those corporations really have in changing your mind?

>Yes, somethings are not meant to
>be generally inclusive. But at
>the same time, somethings could
>be MORE inclusive. Would you
>tell me that the world
>of work is not meant
>to be inclusive, and that
>is why I can expect
>to make 75 cents to
>every dollar a man makes?
>And that I should learn
>to deal with that? If
>I don't have to deal
>with something, I don't want
>to.

The labor world is much different from the fashion and beauty industry. The fashion and beauty industry depends on the look- and the standard, to be generally inclusive or "fair" would contradict the whole point. If the motives and the morality of the fashion industry dont fit your own personal beliefs then dont deal with it- like I said Fuck Vogue. If you're expecting that people should change their minds to fit a more inclusive philosophy thats an admirable wish- but it doesnt involve much action. Its not even fair to people who would choose to do otherwise.

You admit that there's no changing what people believe yet you insist that those beliefs should be adjusted in order to comfort the people that arent respected in them.


K

We can't force people to change their minds, but we can try to get them to do so. There's a difference in being able to open up a window in someone's mind and forcing them to believe in something. There's no sense in trying to keep status quo around. The only reason why women enjoy more freedoms today is because people got sick and tired, and tried to DO something about it.

So what can you do to try and change someone's mind? It's not hard. Keep your ears open. If someone says degradingly (because I guess someone COULD say this in a positive way) "She looks like an African"...you can say, what's wrong with that? Question people on their own ideas of beauty. If their ideas are sound, they won't fall. Keep positive images of people who look like the children that you are around around you. Talk about what you think is beautiful that goes against the grain. Every little thing does count.

"You might as well pay attention/ you can't afford free speech" -George Clinton

http://www.funkknots.com look at the wonderful art! No it ain't mine! Just go there!Support your fellow player, ffunkknots

"Let them have their toy, we've got books."
Bill Cosby's response to Tavis Smiley of "BET Tonight "regarding the lack of minorities on television."

"Multiculturalism is a white people joke. Black people have always been here as different. People need to stop saying that there is one way to be--and then the issue will disappear." Ntozake Shange-interview in _Mother_ _Jones_

"Talk about what you think is beautiful that goes against the grain. Every little thing does count. "

But what if what you think is beautiful- doesnt go against the grain.

Let's play devil's advocate- I think light skinned Black women are beautiful.

what would your response be

K

I'd be like Pepe in Muppets In Space...
"okaaay..."
I'd probably wonder about your intentions. I would wonder why you thought that. because for hundreds of years, lighter skinned women have been the "prize" (it's terrible to think of women that way, but let's face it, people do think that way).
Add on "I like light skinned women with long hair" and I'd be even more cynical towards your motives.
It's hard to distinguish certain parts of personal preference from self-hate, internecine racism, and the like. But I can definitely say that it is obvious that self-hate and internecine racism exist.

"You might as well pay attention/ you can't afford free speech" -George Clinton

http://www.funkknots.com look at the wonderful art! No it ain't mine! Just go there!Support your fellow player, ffunkknots

"Let them have their toy, we've got books."
Bill Cosby's response to Tavis Smiley of "BET Tonight "regarding the lack of minorities on television."

"Multiculturalism is a white people joke. Black people have always been here as different. People need to stop saying that there is one way to be--and then the issue will disappear." Ntozake Shange-interview in _Mother_ _Jones_

"It's hard to distinguish certain parts of personal preference from self-hate, internecine racism, and the like"

Lets say I DO like light skinned women with long hair- we can make the inference that I dont like dark skinned women with short hair but thats not necessarily the case and its certainly what my statement amounts to.

Me personally- I come from a family of light skinned people on my mother's side- all light skinned with long, dark, hair- as many say we have indian in us (namely cherokee).

Now if Im to guide the primary intentions of my preferences towards that which I was raised through, light skinned women with dark hair is not necessarily some arbitrary fashion ideal im leaning towards but that which half of my family is comprised of.

to set the record straight- despite my family's overwhelming lightness I am more caramel colored- cuz my pops was darker. Currently Im dating a woman who matches my complexion perfectly. Despite what my mating choice indicates- I am fond of light skinned women but this doesnt diminish my capacity to be fond of darker skinned women or women from other cultures.

In my opinion beauty is in the eye of the beholder- this doesnt just mean that we are all entitled to conclude what makes for beauty but that we are also obliged to use our own idealogy to assess that beauty. To me any light skinned woman is beautiful cuz they look like my mother- is that wrong?

K

Of course it's not wrong. My mother is a lot lighter than me, and she's beeyootiful. And if you don't think so, then you're wrong. This is still a complex issue though. too bad i'm tired of arguing for the day.

"You might as well pay attention/ you can't afford free speech" -George Clinton

http://www.funkknots.com look at the wonderful art! No it ain't mine! Just go there!Support your fellow player, ffunkknots

"Let them have their toy, we've got books."
Bill Cosby's response to Tavis Smiley of "BET Tonight "regarding the lack of minorities on television."

"Multiculturalism is a white people joke. Black people have always been here as different. People need to stop saying that there is one way to be--and then the issue will disappear." Ntozake Shange-interview in _Mother_ _Jones_

>There's a difference in the power
>dynamic surrounding these practices. Africans
>lightnening their skin is a
>result of Eurocentric thought imposed
>by colonialism and a culturally
>dominated world market.
>
>Europeans wanting to be "darker" carries
>a different (although related) historical
>weight. They want to be
>"tan" but not TOO dark
>... just dark enough to
>capitalize on racist fantasies of
>dark=wild. Yet, as dark as
>they get, they will never
>be mistaken for black. They
>know that they can be
>"exotic" yet still white in
>the end.
>

I agree with that statement 100 percent, but for most white folks tanning, can be a healthy partice when done in moderation... but I have seen a few white chick(en head)s who wanted to have that exotic look, so they used the tanning lotion, one looked purple the other orange, effin wierd lookin is what it is! hey the #1 reason why I tan is so I won't burn, durrin the hot ass new-england summers, the sun burn is what causes cancer, not the tan!

youve been bleaching ya skin again? tsk tsk!




"the complexity of simplicity" Flo and me

"everything and nothing" Me and Flo


http://www.tankgreen.com
The revolution has tits and clits and drinks earl grey baby


need some new vinyl?
http://www.recordkingdom.com/

grey effin matter to this guy
http://www.h8r.com h8...h8 on..

Factology -vs- theology
http://www.factology.com

Order of the Ancient Ones
http://egiptianmysteries.com

"i soar up above you oh mortals
for i have kissed the sky as a falcon
i am not for the land i am for the stars...." Prayer of Osiris

Still cant get my skin grey- like God intended- the fur is coming along nicely though.

K

I saw an ad last week in an American magazine targeting black people with a fade cream...it said NOTHING about trying to get rid of skin discolorations.

"You might as well pay attention/ you can't afford free speech" -George Clinton

http://www.funkknots.com look at the wonderful art! No it ain't mine! Just go there!Support your fellow player, ffunkknots

"Let them have their toy, we've got books."
Bill Cosby's response to Tavis Smiley of "BET Tonight "regarding the lack of minorities on television."

"Multiculturalism is a white people joke. Black people have always been here as different. People need to stop saying that there is one way to be--and then the issue will disappear." Ntozake Shange-interview in _Mother_ _Jones_

Black people in the states have been bleaching, doctoring, perming ourselves into whiteness for decades. this is nothing new.

https://twitter.com/onnextlevel

http://www.afroam.org/history/bnw/bwmain.html

I'll be back to respond when I'm not in class....

_____________________ .
Peace.
Inez AKA Starli
http://inez.diaryland.com/

Inez24@prodigy.net
_____________________ .
"Starli/gets the party started
like a car key" -Juice

"At times my going forward seems
like retreat" -Common

Fuck being hard, posdnous is
complicated!

SUPPORT THIS!
http://www.blumagazine.net/

... got a liter of knob creek and a bottle of ether
http://www.flickr.com/photos/annieappleseed/

i'm glad i read this stuff.. this is a different perspective on this kind of thing. i don't know.. i read that african people were bleaching their skin.. and i just assumed it was to be white.. which i realize isn't isn't necessarily true once other folks on the boards brought up the tanning bit.. sometimes i find out i have these messed preconceptions like that and i'm really surprised to find them there. i'm always on some kind of trip on being more openminded than i really am. anyway.. my mistake..


i'd better not be sane.. that's a sad standard, mate. MATE. LAME. SICK.

http://dreamwater.net/estrangular - the definition of underachievment. YES!

My basic point is that ANYTHING you do that could damage your health in order to achieve a certain look is wrong, and there is something wrong with the persons thought process to want to destroy their health for such changes.


>What's the difference between Europeans tanning
>to become darker and Africans
>bleaching to become lighter?

There's huge differences that have been discussed above. I think it all boils down to what people define as "beautiful". I haven't studied the sociology of beauty, psychology...any of that, But it seems to me that most people's concept of "beauty" comes from what is viewed as powerful or successful.

Darker skinned people obviously can see what kind of power light skin can get them.

"White" (white as in the ammount of melanin they have) women have for hundreds of years had to fight to be sexually "liberated"...we all know the position they held in European and American society...and that often slaves and darker servants were viewed as exotic or as sexual beings...

...then there IS colonialism...because I have seen not only people of African decent, but arabs and other medium-toned people hold a lot of respect for lighter complected people, and these are all colonized regions that follow that pattern.


>What is it that makes a
>lateral cosmetic fashion trend an
>appealing and encouraged practice on
>their behalf and signification of
>a deep rooted global self
>esteem problem on ours?

I think it's because of the point I brought before...people with dark skin (that try to lighten their skin) seem to base their concept of beauty on power and racial worth. Darkening the skin seems to be a more recnt problem and seems to have more of a social aspect to it.

>It seems to me the major
>concern would be health consciousness
>but even there the door
>swings both ways- overexposure to
>the sun can be damaging
>nonetheless we dont necessarily consider
>"white" people pawns in the
>game for taking part.

I DO NOT buy the arguement that lighter people need to tan for health - that is an apparent flaw in the concept of beauty also. In times past people needed to be lighter to deal with climate issues in northern regions. Saying that small amounts of melanin need to be added from slight exposure to sun is like saying it can't hurt to bleach "just a little bit". Granted, we ALL need exposure to the sun for the benefits it does give us...but that is a small amount each day, not so much that we burn our skin. there is SPf protection that can be used.

And not that anything is wrong with slight tanning from being outside - but the argument that tanning is NEEDED in small amounts is not based on any kind of medical information...and may even harm very fair people.

The fact that someone is disgusted by seeing another's veins show's that people can not accept skin for what it is and must put some kind scale for an acceptable skin color that we all should follow.

Either way, not accepting and protecting our skin in it's natural state is unhealthy and anyone that would go to an extreme and that would risk their health has been affected by SOMETHING to want to do such.


_____________________ .
Peace.
Inez AKA Starli
http://inez.diaryland.com/

Inez24@prodigy.net
_____________________ .
"Starli/gets the party started
like a car key" -Juice

"At times my going forward seems
like retreat" -Common

Fuck being hard, posdnous is
complicated!

SUPPORT THIS!
http://www.blumagazine.net/

... got a liter of knob creek and a bottle of ether
http://www.flickr.com/photos/annieappleseed/

>...then there IS colonialism...because I have
>seen not only people of
>African decent, but arabs and
>other medium-toned people hold a
>lot of respect for lighter
>complected people, and these are
>all colonized regions that follow
>that pattern.

Are the Arab countries colonized?

>>What is it that makes a
>>lateral cosmetic fashion trend an
>>appealing and encouraged practice on
>>their behalf and signification of
>>a deep rooted global self
>>esteem problem on ours?
>
>I think it's because of the
>point I brought before...people with
>dark skin (that try to
>lighten their skin) seem to
>base their concept of beauty
>on power and racial worth.
>Darkening the skin seems to
>be a more recnt problem
>and seems to have more
>of a social aspect to
>it.

My contention is it seems awfully presumptuous to make this statement about people's intentions- I have never seen any person who is willing to do this to themselves discuss their motives yet everybody under the sun speaks for them.

>And not that anything is wrong
>with slight tanning from being
>outside - but the argument
>that tanning is NEEDED in
>small amounts is not based
>on any kind of medical
>information...and may even harm very
>fair people.

Actually I had a pale girlfriend once- her doctor did prescribe tanning every two weeks to cure her psoriasis.

>The fact that someone is disgusted
>by seeing another's veins show's
>that people can not accept
>skin for what it is
>and must put some kind
>scale for an acceptable skin
>color that we all should
>follow.

uh-oh you cant front on that.

>Either way, not accepting and protecting
>our skin in it's natural
>state is unhealthy and anyone
>that would go to an
>extreme and that would risk
>their health has been affected
>by SOMETHING to want to
>do such.


I has chosen the objective route and makes a pretty measured argument- My contention is that the difference or danger in either case is the fashion in which you achieve the desired look. If you're willing to step out of the bounds of your normal schedule to adjust your skin condition then your embarking on a mission that diminishes the integrity of your body as "god intended". Now im not advocating for religion but if any assessment of Black people must incorporate the tendencies and results of racial oppression then in my opinion the whole issue should be elevated equally.

Some of us totally undermine the integrity of choice that Black people have in doing this- claiming that it autmatically signifies a colonialized mind- well then the same arguments are in effect for tanning, or maybe even hair coloring, hair extensions, tattooing, and cosmetic surgery.

My problem is whenever "whites" engage in such things (on a large scale I might add) we rarely propose that they have no autonomy to make such decisions.

I think that premise is insulting.

K

>
>>...then there IS colonialism...because I have
>>seen not only people of
>>African decent, but arabs and
>>other medium-toned people hold a
>>lot of respect for lighter
>>complected people, and these are
>>all colonized regions that follow
>>that pattern.
>
>Are the Arab countries colonized?
>

Well in the countries not in Africa, the colonization that has occurred is a lot more insidious and complex (in my opion)...the only countries that I can name off the top of my head are Lebanon...and all the North African countries . Libya was taken over by Italy, and the rest were british or french colonies I think. I consider Iran to be something of a colony also with the ayatolla business that went on.


>>I think it's because of the
>>point I brought before...people with
>>dark skin (that try to
>>lighten their skin) seem to
>>base their concept of beauty
>>on power and racial worth.
>>Darkening the skin seems to
>>be a more recnt problem
>>and seems to have more
>>of a social aspect to
>>it.
>
>My contention is it seems awfully
>presumptuous to make this statement
>about people's intentions- I have
>never seen any person who
>is willing to do this
>to themselves discuss their motives
>yet everybody under the sun
>speaks for them.

I can speak. I am half filipino and Irish, and i am the lightest one of the family. Actually lighter than most "white" folks. I HATE my skin color because I was never raised around anyone "white" (just for convenient use Koala!)...so I did tan in order to achieve what I feel is true beauty. Although I am way more concious of what motivates me than most people are, I think it's just about the same when people will do anything extreme to "beautify" themselves. No one can tell me that young girls who starve themselves are doing it of their, complete. something has influenced them to believe they need to change.

>Actually I had a pale girlfriend
>once- her doctor did prescribe
>tanning every two weeks to
>cure her psoriasis.
>

Ok perhaps I am wrong...but for the most part tanning isn't NEEDED, just exposure to sun.


>I has chosen the objective route
>and makes a pretty measured
>argument- My contention is that
>the difference or danger in
>either case is the fashion
>in which you achieve the
>desired look. If you're willing
>to step out of the
>bounds of your normal schedule
>to adjust your skin condition
>then your embarking on a
>mission that diminishes the integrity
>of your body as "god
>intended". Now im not advocating
>for religion but if any
>assessment of Black people must
>incorporate the tendencies and results
>of racial oppression then in
>my opinion the whole issue
>should be elevated equally.
>

I agree, but I think that Black people are scrunitized - by themselves and others - way more than white people are. White people rarely (and there are exceptions) question their motivations, so issues like this have not even been considered fully.

>Some of us totally undermine the
>integrity of choice that Black
>people have in doing this-
>claiming that it autmatically signifies
>a colonialized mind- well then
>the same arguments are in
>effect for tanning, or maybe
>even hair coloring, hair extensions,
>tattooing, and cosmetic surgery.
>
>My problem is whenever "whites" engage
>in such things (on a
>large scale I might add)
>we rarely propose that they
>have no autonomy to make
>such decisions.
>
>I think that premise is insulting.

It is, but my point is that white folks are all a lot more affected by the past than anyone notices, and black people do have more autonomy over their personal choices, it's a gray area in between that no one will acknowledge.

People are just simply not examining why they do the things they do and taking the easy way out.
_____________________ .
Peace.
Inez AKA Starli
http://inez.diaryland.com/

Inez24@prodigy.net
_____________________ .
"Starli/gets the party started
like a car key" -Juice

"At times my going forward seems
like retreat" -Common

Fuck being hard, posdnous is
complicated!

SUPPORT THIS!
http://www.blumagazine.net/

... got a liter of knob creek and a bottle of ether
http://www.flickr.com/photos/annieappleseed/

>Black. Are we so ready
>to conclude that Black people
>want to become "White" by
>bleaching or is it still
>possible for a Black person
>to want a lighter complexion
>but not necessarily abandon their
>ethnicity?

you're right though, it's the individuals..feel like you've got three seperate issues that are all rooted in some form in 'false' class distinctions:

many white folks tan because they can, like if I say it denotes you've got the leisure time and will to relax despite all else. a white farmer in his field all summer every year is too tanned and the office drone that never gets out is too pale.

then you've got the black folks of way back..I think that paler skin was a rarity and a novelty, one without any real value outside itself like a semi-precious stone. some admired, some prolly hated and more than a few aspired to that easy route to easier life.

then you've got the effects of colonisation..one of my better friends at school was a mixed kenyan-english and he was one of the smarter kids in my year and my great-aunt loved this kid. she was like of 'course he's smart, what do you expect.'

and you'll get the tanning pills/beds, bleaching creams/lotions and peoples that are happy just to sit next to a white kid in class - because somebody always wants to take it further. the vast majority of people in each group don't think it necessary to take those shortcuts to whatever folks think they'll find on the other side.
______________________________________

seize your time! - marley/wailers

sometimes I believe the hype, man - ice cube

-secretly - of course - that's why they tan...while Black ppl wanna B White....

Ok, that is an extreme....but check this out:
There are certain biological benefits to having melanin. Right? Like the aging process, the ability to "do the sun" in volume, etc....

While there are certainly benefits to having the lighter skin....Like working in the big house and owning the big house....Obvious perks, right?

Am I being fecitous? Yes.

I LOVE my chocolate, dark skin! Non dark people love it too - and a lot more than other dark ppl. But it's Ok.....as Fred Sanford said at the possibility of Lamont dating a white woman: "Let her start at a high yella and work her way up" - I'm the elevated species!


Live from the Shoe Sto'
Choc-o-late NuShooz

I,I, I Can't Wait!

nushooz@blackplanet.com

Live from the Shoe Sto, the Mall and NOW the courtroom


I, I, I Can't Wait?
U've waited long enuff!