Colorism

Colorism: Past and Present

Historically, colorism derives from notions of supremacy, with white Northern European standards being the “ideal” against which all others are measured. For the most part, white Northern European features have been and are favored over “colored” (e.g., African, Asian, Indian) features. In short bursts, as in the 1960s and 1970s, darker skin color was revered among some progressive Americans in movements celebrating ethnic identity, as seen in the “Black is Beautiful” and “la Raza” movements. This cohesiveness, evident in prideful movements, served to unify ethnic groups, sometimes to the degree that light-skinned coethnics were viewed by some as inferior, their skin color being evidence of mixed-race ancestry. This type of intraracial colorism, as with interracial colorism, is also a form of racial bias.

With regard to women of color specifically and the effects of intraracial colorism, Margaret Hunter examines the advantages and disadvantages of light skin. Although light skin is considered a social advantage, Hunter explains the obscure disadvantages of light skin among colored peoples, with such skin tones representing a suspected absence of racial consciousness. Lighter-colored African Americans and Mexican Americans are often rejected by their own ethnic communities. Valid or not, a judgment of ethnic inauthen-ticity prevails, resulting in attitudes that the lighter-colored ethnic members are not “Chicano enough” or “black enough.”

In some respects, colorism in the United States may be seen as having “come a long way” and in some ways not. In the early 20th century, the United [Page 148]States experienced a eugenics movement that sought to eliminate people of color largely by denying them reproduction. Prejudicial strategies such as eugenics have been replaced by subtler forms of colorism. For example, for as long as it has existed, the Miss America beauty pageant has been viewed by some as principally having to do with race, gender, and the U.S. national culture as a “commodity culture.” More recently, overtones of obj edification and exploitation of women, racism, and reactionary nationalism represented in the pageant have become complicated by the participation of increasing numbers of nonwhite contestants. In an increasingly multiethnic and multiracial society such as the United States, beauty pageants may be seen as enforcing dominant, universal norms of beauty, juxtaposing white women against “the other” (nonwhite) women. African American women did not participate in the pageant until 1970 and did not win until 1984. In the meantime, they straightened their hair and tried to “pass” for white. Some critical observers have suggested that the inclusion of women of color into beauty pageants creates an idea of tolerance while simultaneously underscoring white beauty standards. In other words, by allowing participants of color, the contest appears to observe equal opportunity; nonetheless, minority participants are most likely to qualify if they have European facial features and “good hair” (meaning straight and smooth).

...