#intraracial colorism

[colorism-project]

The Impact of Colorism on Women of Color: A Fireside Chat

Join scholars  Dr. Julie Jung (Moderator), Dr. Lena Sharda, Ms. Simran Anjari, Dr. Patrice Le Goy, and Dr. Donnamaria Culbreth, along with student guest, Ms. Ruchi Gali, for “The Impact of Colorism on Women of Color: A Fireside Chat” at the Ronald E. Hall Conference on Colorism on Friday, August 23, 2024 at 4:00 p.m. CST. Register today! Website: https://colorismconf.com

[nashvillethotchicken]

I wish there were more black people who were into iwtv so I can talk about how Louis's class and race interests intersected

[yssa3002]

Rolling Up the Partition III: School Daze (1988) Viewing Response

In Spike Lee's 1988 film, School Daze, we see tensions over Apartheid in South Africa rise between the students at Mission College, an HBCU. The film follows Dap, and his darker-skinned friends as they "battle" against the lighter-skinned men of the Gamma Phi Gamma fraternity. Through the clever usage of mise-en-scène, the film displays a recurring theme of "stand-off" scenes (shown below). These shots are integral parts of the film as they communicate the reality of division between black students in the post-civil rights scene. These scenes are meant to represent the aspects of life which separate the student body, the main one addressed in the film being class/privilege in relation to skin color.

In Candice M. Jenkins’s essay, “New Bourgeoisie, Old Bodies: Performing Post-Civil Rights Black Privilege in Tar Baby and School Daze”, she discusses the growing disparity in black communities due to the rise of the black bourgeoise. In the film, this black bourgeoisie is portrayed as having fairer skin, blue/green eyes, and straightened hair. The reasoning behind this being that "Those bodies that most visibly display marks of Caucasian ancestry [...] have a special claim upon intraracial class privilege" (Jenkins, 621). However, this narrative is challenged, quite effectively I think, in one particular scene where Dap and his friends leave campus to get KFC. There they come across a group of older black men, the "leader" being a man named Leeds who proceeds to say, "Naw, I bet y'all do think y'all white." This accusation is ironic as Dap and his friends consider themselves to be in touch with their black heritage, and detest their fellow "wannabe" classmates, as in they "want" to be white. This scene's effectiveness is found in the fact that it takes place off campus, and that it serves as a reminder to Dap and his friends of their own privilege to be attending college in the first place. This scene furthers the reality of how nuanced black identity was/is, and how there is always going to be a differing in opinion when it comes to what it is to be black.

I thought the final scene of the film came full circle, while also including the viewers in a way as well. As we know, there are many instances when two groups have a "stand-off", and this is acknowledged in the final scene when the two male leads (Dap and Julian) look to the camera together instead of at one another in opposition. To me, this scene was very powerful in conveying the reality that, at the end of the day, they all share in their identity even if their interpretations of that identity differ.

[thedimensionsblog]

Global Colorism in the Millennium: An Interview with Ronald E. Hall, Ph.D.

Ronald E. Hall, Ph.D.

Distinguished Scholar and the “Father of Colorism”

Friday, April 19, 2024

4:30-5:30 pm CST

Join Dr. Donnamaria Culbreth, Host of the Dimensions Podcast and distinguished scholar and the “father of colorism” Ronald E. Hall, Ph.D., Professor in the School of Social Work in the College of Social Science at Michigan State University for an interview and discussion on global colorism in the millennium. Topics will include colorism as a global issue, skin bleaching, physical and mental health, colorism in education, the workplace, and society, and the psychological, emotional, physical and social impact of colorism.  

Colorism involves distinctions based on skin color (light, medium or dark) and results in the favorable or unfavorable treatment of individuals based on the lightness or darkness of their skin color and can include other phenotypes. Colorism is complex because it occurs interracially, intraracially, consciously, unconsciously, intentionally and unintentionally.

Biography of Ronald E. Hall, Ph.D.

Before earning his doctorate, Ronald E. Hall enabled his professional career as a clinical social worker in the city of Detroit. His occupational role encompassed the practice of individual and group psychotherapy with schizophrenic and manic-depressive clients. Subsequent to numerous clinical observations, Dr. Hall advocated the notion of colorism, among people of color, as a critical dynamic relative to mental health. Having written his dissertation on colorism, Dr. Hall devised the "Bleaching Syndrome" to theoretically explain this social dynamic among people of color.

Dr. Hall’s colorism research comprises more than 300 (co)-authored publications, interviews, and presentations pertaining to the issue of colorism. Of note are commentaries on Justice Clarence Thomas and President Barack Obama via TIME magazine and Oprah Winfrey via The Color Complex. On January 19, 2015, Dr. Hall was featured in Bill Duke’s “Light Girls” hosted by the OWN. His notable book credits include The Color Complex(revised from 1992), which was published in 2013. In 2003, Dr. Hall won the Mellen Prize for Distinguished Contribution to Scholarship for publication of Skin Color as a Post-Colonial Issue Among Asian-Americans. His most recent book is titled Interdisciplinary Perspectives on Colorism: Beyond Black & White (July 2022). His forthcoming book is titled the Routledge International Handbook on Colorism: Bigotry Beyond Borders.

Dr. Hall has lectured on colorism both domestically and internationally, including by invitation Bates College (Lewiston, ME), Pennsylvania State University (State College, PA), Oxford University (Oxford, UK), U.S. Consulate (Mumbai, India) and return to the University of Faisalabad (Pakistan). As part of his worldwide research on colorism in May of 2015, Dr. Hall traveled to Johannesburg, South Africa to lecture and collect colorism data after which during the previous 14 years, he will have covered colorism per every major racial group on the planet. That includes Europeans, and a Native-American reservation in North Dakota. Among other international speaking events, also include Paramaribo, Suriname, where he was guest speaker for a medical convention convened to address skin color. Dr. Hall also lectured on skin color in India at the Jindal Global University in Delhi and the Tata Institute of Social Sciences in Mumbai. He was then invited after return to the U.S. to speak in Washington D.C. by Congressman Bobby L. Rush on issues pertaining to skin color. In addition to the local, Dr. Hall was the lead presenter at the Global Perspectives on Colorism Conference hosted by the Washington University School of Law in St. Louis, Mo. Continuing his global trek, on November 20, 2021, Dr. Hall lectured by Zoom at the 2nd International Conference on Dermal Sciences: Psychosocial Impact of Colorism at the University of Faisalabad, Faisalabad, Pakistan. Most recently on February 25, 2022, Dr. Hall was requested by the U.S. Consulate General in Mumbai, India to lecture at its conference titled: Is Colorism Only Skin Deep? Lastly, as posted by The Conversation academic website for American university professors. Dr. Hall has attracted over a million readers who follow his work.

Previously, Dr. Hall testified as an expert witness for the nation’s first African-American colorism litigation in Morrow v. IRS, Atlanta Federal District Court (1990). On select occasions since he has served as consultant for attorneys in need of colorism expertise. Two years following Morrow v. IRS he co-authored The Color Complex published in 1992 and revised for re-release in 2013. Subsequently The Color Complex maintains active book sales 30 years later in 2022. Book publications in total by Dr. Hall include 16 titles. Academic papers published by Dr. Hall existent around the world exceed 100 in total. He has designed a yet to be offered class on colorism at MSU and among its approximately 3,000 faculty/staff is ranked second most read on the Conversation website. Dr. Hall is confident about the global existence of colorism having collected both quantitative and qualitative data from humanity at-large.

In 2022, the Colorism Project, Inc. hosted the first virtual conference on colorism in the United States named after Dr. Hall in recognition of his distinguished scholarship in colorism. In addition, the Ronald E. Hall Research Colorism Research Scholarship was created in the same year and will award scholarships to graduate students pursuing colorism research at the second virtual Ronald E. Hall Conference on Colorism in August of 2024.

[colorismhealing]

Historical Roots of Colorism Part 1: Colonial Era

We must recognize that modern-day forms of intraracial colorism are either rooted in or reinforced by the interracial history of colonialism. However, there’s another truth that challenges the typical notion that colorism is merely a subsidiary outcome or tactic of racism: Race is a social construct, but skin tone is a biological fact with socially constructed meanings, one of which is race…

[papirouge]

"it is odd the number of times people default to platonic shipping (...)when a dark-skinned Black woman and protagonist, usually a white man, are paired together. She says that if the Black woman in question is light-skinned, or if the dark-skinned Black woman is in an intraracial ship, then people don’t care as much. (...)Black women have been typecast into offensive caricatures for decades — especially darker-skinned Black women, and especially in romance media. According to Atlanta-based filmmaker Jamila Bell, colorism can be more prominent in genres like the rom-com or, frankly, any story that involves love interests due to biases against dark-skinned women. “​[In older media] ​dark-skinned ​Black ​women ​were ​definitely ​portrayed ​as ​more ​aggressive, ​more ​​argumentative, [as if] it’s ​hard ​to ​get ​them ​to ​settle ​down ​because ​they’re ​just ​so ​overtly ​strong,” says Bell. “Then ​I ​saw ​a ​shift ​of ​them ​becoming ​the ​sidekicks ​and ​the ​best ​friends, ​and ​they’re ​just ​so ​funny ​and ​always ​the ​scapegoat ​of ​the ​comedy ​aspect — which ​is ​not ​necessarily ​a ​bad ​thing, but ​when ​you ​see ​that ​becoming ​a ​trope, ​there’s ​a ​reason ​for ​that ​trope. It’s ​because ​a ​lot ​of ​these ​filmmakers [are] ​not ​seeing ​these ​women [or their] ​ability to ​be ​in ​these ​leading [romantic] ​roles.” The Black best friend trope has groomed generations of television audiences to only accept Black women as their mammy and magical negress wrapped into one. The most these characters could hope to be is the “disposable Black girlfriend,” but never the most desired, never the leading lady.

(...)

Black women are not just the side characters for comic relief or present only to aid the protagonist along their journey — they are the main characters, too. And as we all know, protagonists get love interests. So get used to it."

AND THAT'S ON THAT.

Pretty good read! From a fellow Sydcarmy truther!

[princessnijireiki]

I have to admit I DO think it's funny when woc clock the difference between male celebs of color HAPPENING to date a ww, vs being colorstruck/treating ww as a status symbol or "upgrade," vs psychologically like. doing that thing where some poc think they can osmotically approximate whiteness or white adjacent/"respectable" status through a white partner (*this includes ww as beards or respectability shields for maximum heteronormativity lol)...

and then immediately begin CLOWNING those dudes while moc, ww, AND wm get TIGHT about it & very in their feelings on social media— when like it is SUCH a specific dynamic being observed that they don't care to have a light shed on while woc are VERY used to navigating the space between when & where & how we are secretly vs openly desired or rejected & why, incl in being able to recognize fetishization of ourselves + cultural fetishization of white ppl by poc for their whiteness—

and incl the way bm in particular IMMEDIATELY call open season on bw they don't want/won't admit to wanting dating "outside the race" out of spite, jealousy, hatefulness, and essentially wanting to ~put bw in their place~ esp bw with the audacity to be unattractive or unattainable to them (or both), but ABSOLUTELY cannot take the heat when the jokes go the other way & come from genuine observation rather than possessiveness (ie we're laughing AND got the nerve not to want them, bc these the same dudes to call women gold diggers & get mad if someone's like "this you?" when their bank account's STEADY at $0.28), or if the jokes are just like "damn too bad. oh well" bc if bw stay in their minds rent free they cannot fathom bw both LAUGHING at them AND IGNORING them.

like idc it's funny EVERY single time. you REALLY REALLY REALLY REALLY BIG big big mad that bw/woc in general can share a Look of Color™️ & then laugh bc the social conditioning is SO obvious but also SOOOO central to how some of these bm/moc conceptualize themselves as men & how they visualize the very notion of sexual, romantic, and familial success! that's clown shit, luv!

[ph-performance]

La principale règle est de plaire et de toucher : toutes les autres ne sont faites que pour parvenir à cette première. in " Esquisse d'un système dramatique " tirée des préfaces de Racine [ Et on nous envoie tous nous dans une pièce de la maison où nous cachons tous jusqu'à ce qu'à ce qu'on se dise qu'on ne risque plus rien ] •] • • Magasine #cover COLORS, Nov. 1990 ( belingue Port. / Eng. ) retrouvé dans mes archives. COLORS magazine proposait à l'époque des thèmes traités dans une perspective internationale et de façon artistique et thématique 💕 des sujets encore à jour en 2021. • • • • • #tocar #touch #toucher  #contexteactuel #pastoucher  #pasdebisous #donottouch #contextoactual #naotocar #nokiss #sembeijar #covermagazine #colors #guys #intraracial #kissingmen #fabricabenetton #magazinesarchive #magazines #aids #fat #time #death #war #systeme #dramatique #jeanracine #citation #onrisquerien https://www.instagram.com/p/CJjcYx1Md0i/?igshid=palledtefryf

[kemetic-dreams]

Wallace Henry Thurman was in the early 1930s acknowledged as one of the leading novelists, poets, critics, and playwrights of the Harlem Renaissance. Yet, he questioned the very existence of the movement. He had arrived in New York in 1925 during the second phase of the Harlem Renaissance, then noted as the most influential movement in African-American literary works and creative culture.While there, he did not only help launch two periodicals dedicated to Black artists but also wrote several plays and three novels, with The Blacker the Berry: A Novel of Negro Life becoming his most well-known novel. Indeed, the novel’s line “the blacker the berry, the sweeter the juice” has been referenced in the works of prominent artistes including Kendrick Lamar and Tupac Shakur. 

That novel was his first. Thurman centered it on intraracial prejudice, colorism and internalized racism in African-American life. He dedicated it to his maternal grandmother, Emma Jackson, who had helped raise him.

[traitor-boyfriend]

a few, more cohesive thoughts:

- saw some people disappointed and/or confused as to why they do not ever directly mention kanye west’s name within the episode for the purposes of “calling out” or drawing attention to his person specifically. truly i don’t believe there was any need to; kanye has been out of the news cycle for a few weeks now but i doubt there were many (if any, at all) viewers for whom there was doubt in who was being parodied. the scene recreating kanye’s infamous appearance with alex jones was plenty clear. this is also not the first episode they’ve done lampooning kanye west (to my recollection this is the third, the first two being fishsticks and the hobbit, plus his role in tfbw), so anything more in terms of demonstrating who this episode’s ire was focused toward would just be gratuitous.

- even for south park, i think it was a bold move to tackle the topic of black/jewish intraracial relations through tolkien and kyle. white/black race relations are something they have done many times over (often through tolkien as a character, notably his strain with stan in apologies to jesse jackson), as well as kyle facing both casual and more severe antisemitism courtesy of both cartman and the town, but this is a much trickier needle to thread that is made evident by all the tepid, tight-lipped discourse surrounding kanye west’s anti-apology tour. not that kanye west has not sustained widespread criticism -- he has -- but that your average american probably knew little beforehand or only vaguely about the existence of the black hebrew israelites, the 5% nation, the nation of islam, or other comparable fringe black supremacist groups that frequently traffic in antisemitic rhetoric because this contradicts the oversimplified game of identity politics telephone we play in that black = victim and white/white-adjacent = oppressor. it was a smart narrative choice to not have token go full-blown louis farrakhan but that his racial slight to kyle is more subtle and not revealed as bought-in until kyle accuses him of such, because that is more true to life and what actually happens when we as a society are passively tolerant of prejudicial belief when we feel the offending group has “earned” the right to or has no hierarchical infrastructure to enact sociopolitical enforcement of said prejudice.

it’s clear that kyle as a character, despite the racism he faces not being based strictly on ‘the color of his skin’, feels a sense of racial solidarity with nonwhite characters and analogizes his experiences with antisemitism to what we more often think of when we think of racist behavior, specifically towards black people. we saw it previously with david, and like with david, kyle is sometimes unaware of where that line is demarcated and he can’t make a one-to-one bid for understanding with nonwhite characters. i viewed his remark to david (”but this isn’t mexico!” / “i’m not from mexico, i’m from idaho!”) as similar to his remark to token (”there’s lots of black people in the NBA, but no one says ‘”the NBA is run by black people!’” / “that’s because the NBA is run by white people!”) and in both of these scenarios, kyle is stunned by his own oversight and is ashamed and/or embarrassed, and it upsets him. and i don’t think we’re meant to interpret this upset as meaning “kyle wishes he experienced racism the same or as severely as non-jewish, nonwhite characters”, but rather instills a further sense of alienation to know there are indeed asterisks to this racial solidarity -- the idea that he has one foot in both worlds, essentially, and does not neatly fit into a simplified american racial narrative.

tolkien further demonstrates that kyle’s own sense of similitude with him is not reciprocal during their fight when kyle comments that “jews have stood alongside blacks since the civil rights movement began,” and kyle’s anger at tolkien not being a better friend (”’cause you’re like...”) which incenses tolkien; this presumption that he may ‘owe’ kyle the courtesy of disbelieving antisemitic rhetoric or hate speech because they share the baser commonality of sitting outside the dominant WASP racial hierarchy. at this point tolkien believes -- and more broadly, the belief of aforementioned antisemitic black supremacist ideology -- is that it is an egregious overstepping of boundaries for kyle, as a jew, to insinuate “i suffer like you do.” especially not when so much antisemitism is grounded in the belief that jews are akin to a covert secret society that reaps immense wealth, power, dominate industry, and conspire to destroy the way of life of all “others.”

for the sake of clarity (and brevity), i’m not here to write a 500 pg. dissertation on the relationship between jewish americans and black americans, i’m merely here to pick apart the motivations and underlying system of logic happening between these two characters in context of a broader societal conversation that’s been taking place, which i think is exactly what the purpose of these scenes were meant to do. i am curious what kind of input matt and trey might have received in crafting the overarching dialogue for this episode, though -- something in me doubts that this was committed to script based only on input from the writer’s room. i know that matt and trey are in collaboration with kendrick lamar and his media company pgLang to create a movie for paramount -- there was a lot of speculation made at the time of it’s release kendrick lamar’s lyrical references to the black hebrew israelites on his album damn. in the vein of whether this was purely creative or meant to be a spiritual statement of some kind on kendrick lamar’s part (i don’t really believe this to be the case) and the wider association much of rap/hip hop has with these sort of groups and belief systems. i would to love to know if maybe there was some conversation between the three on the topic that informed their approach and i would find that fascinating if it were the case. might be grasping at straws but i’m just a rando with a blog that is far too deep in both the rap scene and south park.  

- related to the above, the credit roll gag: i’ve seen some reactions to the effect of “interesting that matt stone was in charge for this episode” or “wow, this was such a better episode now that matt is more involved!” which is entirely missing the point being made here. it is specifically meant to be jarring because anyone who is used to reading the credits knows that trey parker is almost always listed as the writer/director/etc. so attention is immediately drawn by the fact that it’s matt. this is not meant to be any indication as to actual credit; this is done specifically as a final statement while the episode ends with the crowd entirely misinterpreting kyle’s speech -- the audience all yelling “let the jew run it”, and then the immediate cut to matt stone’s name now being listed for main credits. i’m sure anyone who participates in this niche online fandom culture is fully aware that matt stone is jewish, and that is the gag which accomplishes two things: one, it’s very funny. but more importantly, two, it is a declaration that what they have been lambasting over the previous 22 minutes does in fact impact one half of this duo. whether it directly affects him or not, and regardless of what arbitrary basis people ascribe validity to recognizing matt stone as jewish (the caveat of “but *how* jewish is he, really?”), antisemitism in america -- especially the idea that the jews run or “own” the entertainment business -- is something that affects a cultural and ethnic demographic he belongs to. it is a statement of having skin in the game, so to speak.

- exactly **what** cupid me is seems to be vague. his first appearance suggest that he just is something of an imaginary friend (or, a hallucination) of cartman’s as cartman is the only one who can see or speak with him and he is environmentally extant only to cartman. but he seems more... corporeal this episode? the other children on-face are physically struck by his arrows, mackey remarks that there is a ‘large bee’ flying through the building, which implies there was some physical movement independent of cartman on the ground. yet, we do get the (very funny) scene where cartman haphazardly scurries from tolkien’s bedroom in the night, and the kanye stand-in is cartman-sized. i have not watched the episode a second time yet, so my memory may not be correct, but i also don’t believe we get a pan-out scene when cartman is forcibly giving cupid ye his ‘medicine’ to reveal cartman merely wrestling his own hand. i’ve seen speculation that this is meant to imply cartman is experiencing auditory-visual hallucinations as if he were psychotic or schizophrenic. this could be the case. i don’t think that would be much of a leap to make for his character. what i think is more likely, though, is that for the purpose of this episode cupid me became more of an external entity of cartman’s to act as a facsimile to kanye west, and that isn’t going to reshape continuity greatly or be referenced further. there is also the question of why cartman attempts to foil cupid me -- this degree of antisemitism isn’t really out of character for someone like cartman, but i think that’s the point; it’s well-established that cartman is antisemitic and is a central gag of his character, though treating this as an ironic fourth-wall commentary (”okay, we push it, but this is too far”) was kind of the point. especially if we’re treating cupid ye as simultaneously acting within the subconscious of cartman and independent of him.

- oh my beloved staniel...  i’ve seen some people lament kyle being a horrible friend here and that stan and kyle are drifiting apart and i think that’s a bit of an overdramatization of what’s happening here. it isn’t wrong for kyle to have friends outside of the group; they all have one or two other characters they are shown or implied to be on a friendly basis with outside of the four of them. it’s a very natural feeling though, especially at that age, to be protective of friendships and threatened when something outside of it seems to drive a wedge, but there’s not even a “wedge” -- not really. stan is a more sensitive, emotionally intuitive character SPECIFICALLY in relation to kyle, so it makes perfect sense that it upsets him on some level to see his best friend spending less time with him and more time with someone else bonding through a hobby he doesn’t share. i actually think it’s very sweet, that stan is so demonstrably miserable without kyle. genuinely tugged at my heart in a painful sort of way to see him nervously surprised when he thinks kyle will sit next to him. coming on the heels of the covid specials too, where the apex of the drama was stan and kyle time traveling to their past selves in warning that the rest of their lives will be miserable without the friendship of one another, serves to anchor that tether between stan and kyle. and that stan owns up to his feelings both to tolkien and to kyle, and that even when he feels indirectly hurt by kyle still comes to his defense against the other kids with no hesitation. stan is deeply loyal to kyle and i love whenever he’s given opportunity to demonstrate that.  

- final verdict. i don’t know if this episode will ever reach “classic” status, but it is well above average for south park’s output over the last 5+ years and does a good job of taking a back-to-basics approach in a more modern pop cultural landscape in a way that does not feel bogged down by either the inherent sense of removal matt and trey have toward youth culture given their age nor in an old-man-yells-at-cloud way. i wonder if trey’s daughter getting older and him needing to as a parent be more familiar with these things given her probable participation in social media like tiktok has anything to do with this. much to think about. but a solid 7/10 nonetheless.

- i hope clyde finds the appropriate funding for his and scott’s movie. he already has the first twenty pages written, so.  

Okay. first impressions.

- This is, to me, the strongest season opening since stunning and brave from s19. I am beyond stunned at how much laughing I actually did. For the last few years season openers specifically have often felt like an obligation and not actual fun to watch and this was a breath of fresh air.

- I am thoroughly impressed by the juggling of a pseudo love triangle between Stan, Kyle, and tolkien, the cupid ye/cupid me play on words leading into what is functionally a valentine's day holiday episode, the return of and elaborated depth added to a character we have not seen in a while (cupid me as an extension of -- or, more accurately now, a hallucination and/or delusional alter ego of Cartman), interwoven with topical current events and a smattering of racial commentary. This is the layering I have missed in an episode of South Park for so long. This feels like firing on all cylinders.

- love the setup of tolkien/token (a permanent change, yes?) and Kyle hanging out and Stan seething with jealousy. How external Stan is about his about his emotions specifically when it comes to Kyle. It did kind of actually break my heart a bit when he thinks Kyle is coming to sit with him but instead just asks to borrow a charger.

- love, love, love the juvenility of Kyle and tolkien's dumb tiktoks and that the other kids find them very entertaining. Feels very true to life in that way even if it does make my skin sort of crawl as an adult.

- it was bizarre to see randy out of his tegridy outfit. Is this a sign of things to come? Him being like "gerald, can you just talk to him?" After Kyle reiterates he does not run Hollywood got me.

- the things I could write about Cartman after this episode could fill a library. This will be for another day.

- Stan admitting both to Tolkien and Kyle separately that he was jealous they were spending time together. I really enjoy this burgeoning, plain-spoken emotional maturity from Stan we've seen in recent years. And aiding Kyle and seeking to protect him like always... *World's #1 most forlorn sigh ever*

- the only thing I would've wished to see was just a moment more of back and forth between Stan and Kyle. A few more lines during the scene where Tolkien and Stan come to guard him from the other kids would've been the optimal opportunity.

- Jimmy's headshots.

- the credits all being attributed to Matt stone with trey's being just "assistant to Mr. Stone" is one of the funniest post-ep credit roll gags they've ever done.

All in all this episode came wrapped up to me in a pretty pink bow and was lovingly left on my doorstep. I am actually looking forward to the rest of the season for the first time in a hot minute.

[itonje]

remember seeing and unfortunately (i was stupid) reblogging this post like way way back about how like. i will say east asian women (with fair overlap between central/north asian women but like at the same time like, japan has a different colonial relationship to mongolia or whatnot and i’d feel remiss to not mention that because of what i’m going to say in a minute) get hypersexualized while brown asian women (see, west, southern, southeast asian) women get to be desexualized and masculinized and while i will say that from like. common knowledge and personal experience i do know that brown asian women and other brown/black women like african women, native american women get masculinized they...also get hypersexualized as well? like a huge part of like the colonial relationship in regards to gender is that of the white body’s sexual domination over the nonwhite woman, the exotification and sexual orientalization of her, etc etc. like have you never heard of the sexy wild jungle woman trope, the entire thing with white men and harems in the islamic world, etc etc?????? also the masculinization of nonwhite women almost always has to do with colorism as well because white/pale skin is seen as more ‘gentle’ and ‘tender’ while brown/black skin is associated with ‘brutishness’ which then is linked to masculinity because of you know gender prisons and whatnot (that applies intraracially in said brown asian communities as well!) like a light/white skinned filipina for example, is probably just generally going to be seen as more ‘feminine’ than a dark/brown skinned filipina but that doesnt mean the brown filipina escapes sexualization or whatnot...i don’t know i’m just thinking about that take again and how reductive it was 

[yourwakingnightmares]

quoting you "But our brains are hardwired to find certain things attractive." and you said it on a post when you trying to talk about why people prefer white characters. not hard to figure out what you were saying there, i have reading comprehension (and a not-american education, your assumption was weird). also, here have this not on anon. not a coward just used to racists who pile on if you call them on it, but i can deal.

Dear sir and/or ma’am,

Firstly, kudos! I’m glad we can have an actual conversation without hiding behind anonymity. Still not sure how productive of a conversation we’re going to have, since you’re insistent I’m racist, but I’m now willing to discuss it with you further since we can have an open conversation and dialogue.

No, I did not say that people were hardwired to find white people attractive. I said our brains are weird; that they’re hardwired to find certain things attractive, and -the important bit you missed -is that there’s no rhyme nor reason to why.

For example, to get a bit personal here. I like short, stocky men, and I have a thing for big/abnormal shaped noses on men. Richard Harmon, Seth Gilliam, and Aaron Stanford are examples of this. In women, I like well-muscled and taller than me (which doesn’t take much, I’m 5′2″). Examples of this would include Marie Avgeropoulos, Rosario Dawson, and Lupita Nyong’o.

Now, clearly, I have two very different and distinct things I look for, depending on gender. This makes no sense, logically, and I am well aware of this; if I like large or abnormal shaped noses on men, I should like the same thing on women, logically. If I like short, stocky men, I should like the same thing in women.

But I don’t. Why don’t I? Because what we like isn’t something that we choose; it’s not something that we make a conscious decision about. Our brains are hardwired to find certain things attractive, and we don’t know why. We don’t know what crossed this particular pair of wires together, resulting in liking short men or tall women. We don’t know how those neurons in our brains got so jumbled that we have foot fetishes, or are into dominance play.

Telling people that they are racist because they don’t find a thing attractive is redundant, and can be turned against you very, very easily.

For example. Do you like fat men? Short women? Bald women? Amputees? No? Well, that makes you ableist and sexist! 

Do you have any straight pairings? That makes you homophobic! And don’t even get me started on how screwed over us bi folk get when it comes to fandom shipping; we can’t win either way: because it’s not gay pairings, we’re labeled homophobic, and if it’s gay pairings, we’re labeled as attention seekers, for ‘calling ourselves bi when we’re actually gay’.

Are you starting to see where I’m going with this? You have a thing you like. I’m ambivalent about the thing, or maybe even I actively dislike the thing. Instead of accepting that, you decide to label me as racist.

Let’s say you like purple. Purple is a mixture of red and blue. You love purple, it’s your favorite color. I, however, do not like purple. I prefer orange, and believe that red should be mixed with yellow for the best results.

Am I horrible person for disagreeing with you? Am I bad because I like my red mixed with yellow instead of blue?

(Also, please bear in mind, I don’t see colors well, so this example might not be entirely accurate with the mixing, but I’m hoping your getting my point beyond that).

Let’s use another example here. In the Umbrella Academy, one of the most popular pairings is Luther and Allison. Well, how would you feel if I said that you’re racist for shipping Allison with a white man? As a minority woman, she should only be with other minorities! Therefore, she must be with Diego!

You’d say I’m nuts; clearly, Allison and Diego would be terrible for each other. They’re both very strong-willed, stubborn people with serious attitude problems. But hey, I like the Allison/Diego pairing. I think they’d go well together. I like the bad boy vibes, and Allison is strong enough to tell Diego where to shove it when he starts getting angsty and sarcastic. It could work! 

Let’s go a step further. I ship Diego and Vanya; I think they look absolutely adorable together. On an emotional level, they’re all wrong for each other, and I understand that. But physically? Hell, I dig it. I’d dig it a trench a mile deep. I don’t know why I find them to be so cute together, but I just do.

However, I logically understand that Vanya is gay -or bi, potentially, I’m sure we’ll get that hammered out sooner or later in the show. And I completely accept that character’s decision to be with Sissy. But the two of them together just don’t do it for me. I look at them as a couple and go, ‘meh’. It doesn’t evoke any feeling in me. But that one scene at the end of the last episode, where Vanya just rests her head against Diego, and after a moment, he returns the gesture? That gave me chills. And I decided right then and there, I would die with that ship. Because it made me feel good and happy, and gave me those butterflies floating in my stomach.

Do you pick your partners based off of what you think society wants you to like? I sincerely hope you don’t, and instead follow your heart. I hope you pick your partners or your ships based off of what makes you happy as a person. What makes you get those butterflies, of what gives you chills when you think of them together.

Shipping in fandom is the same. If you’re shipping people based off of what other people tell you you should like, or what you think is socially acceptable to like... You won’t get those butterflies. You won’t get those chills. You won’t get that stupid little grin when you think of the cute shenanigans your pairing gets up to. It will be wooden, mechanical, and soulless. There’s no heart in it, because you’re not shipping what you like... you’re shipping what you think you should like.

Biology doesn’t work like that. Know that whole thing where everybody kept telling gay people not to be gay? To force themselves to be with the opposite gender?

You and I know -hopefully you know, anyways -that that is absolutely stupid. Being gay isn’t a choice; it’s just something you are. As Lady Gaga so aptly put it years ago, we’re just born that way. We like what we like, and telling us to try and be different is not only pointless, but it’s hateful. It’s hurtful. But many large groups -mostly Christian, and/or conservative -insisted that you could just choose to not be gay. You could choose to like the opposite gender, and by not choosing that, you were going straight to hell. 

But this is exactly what you're trying to do with shipping. You are taking the part of the Moral Majority and Jerry Falwell here. You are the one telling people that what they like is wrong! They should just like what you like! If they don’t, they’re terrible bad awful people who should be ashamed of themselves! The Christians/conservatives called them amoral degenerates; you’re calling them hateful racists. But the end result is the same: you’re trying to shame and humiliate anyone who disagrees with you.

Now, I’m not going to make any presumptions about what you like; I don’t know you well enough for that. Maybe you dig interracial couples; maybe you dig gay couples. Maybe you like disabled couples, or dominant/submissive couples.

But whatever it is that you like, or what gets you hot and bothered? I wouldn’t dream of telling you it’s wrong. As long as you keep your IRL stuff consensual? It’s not my place to tell you what you can like. It’s not my place to tell you that your ideas of cute couples are wrong.

More and more lately, I find many fandom shippers using the idea of an ‘ism’ to try and force people to accept their pairing. Whether it’s racism, sexism, homophobia, ageism, classism, ableism... Everybody can throw an ‘ism’ at people who dislike their pairings. It’s relatively easy to do, in fact. Give me any popular pairing, and I can throw an ‘ism’ at it.

Sorry I refuse to be browbeaten into saying that your pairing is more valid than mine. Sorry that I won’t let you bully me into going along with your pairing, and leaving my own by the wayside. Sorry I won’t bow to your threats of calling me mean things to force me to like your ships. Sorry I won’t just sit meekly back, and let you dictate what I’m allowed to find cute, or attractive, or sexy, or hot.

Actually, you know what? No. I’m not sorry. You can try to browbeat me. You can try to bully me. You can try to make me capitulate. You can try and make me sit quietly and not have an opinion.

But it ain’t gonna work. You misconstruing my argument, reading what you want to read in it, cherry picking your way through, or you calling me a racist, sexist, homophobic meanie head isn’t going to force me to root for your ship.

If I find a straight ship cute? I’ll ship it. If I find a gay ship cute? I’ll ship it. If I find a bi ship cute? I’ll ship it. If I find an interracial ship cute? I’ll ship it. If I find a intraracial ship cute? I’ll ship it. If I find a disabled/abled ship cute? I’ll ship it.

I will ship what I ship, and no amount of you throwing stones is going to force me to abandon my ship.

[thesagechronicles]

Beauty of Color on Twitter Revived #PocInLove and the Result is Beautiful!

Click here to see more pictures!

[hamsahands]

For my Afrodescendant people only: White supremacy is more pernicious than you think. I have been seeing some Black folks post things like 'if Black lives matter then stop killing eachother'. They are typically the same folks who were upset about the looting and rioting and may have said things like 'they make us look bad.' My brothers and sisters, my siblings and friends, this kind of thinking is the result of internalized white supremacy.

The vast majority of violent crime is intraracial, meaning it occurs within a racial demographic. Therefore, the notion of black on black crime is a racist invention. This is the work of police departments producing inflated statistics on crime, which in reality translates to more policing in predominantly Black neighborhoods and less in white ones.

The idea of 'black on black crime' is the work of the media, which for centuries has fueled racial anxieties by inventing the stereotype of Black criminality and has used this to justify segregation, over policing, and mass incarceration. This subtle and at times overt bias is perpetuated by consumers of this media, Black people included (read Locking Up Our Own by James Forman). Mass shootings are disproportionately enacted by white men and most of their victims are white. But they don't call that white on white crime.

My beautiful Black people, do not internalize the microscope white supremacy has forced you to live under. It has tried to rob Black people of their individuality since the days of chattel slavery when our enslaved ancestors were forced to take the names of their masters. Names that remain with us to this day. Black people have been collectively punished throughout history, a symptom of this trauma is when Black folks believe the actions of one or a few represent the many or all. It is a byproduct of a media culture that focuses on a single Black person but insinuates an indictment of all of them. There is no collective Black privilege because there are no power structures that work to reinforce an imagined Black supremacy.

Other symptoms of internalized white supremacy include colorism and class prejudice. Both are predicated on power structures centered on whiteness and wealth, and in a country where inequality is frequently racialized they are often one in the same. While white folks unlearn subconscious racism, Black folks must unlearn its damaging effects on ourselves and eachother.

It is important to talk about gun violence in Black neighborhoods. It is important to talk about it in general because it's a problem throughout the country, even beyond Black communities. Too often the focus is on the what and a particular who but rarely the why.

When we talk about gun violence in Black neighborhoods, do we also talk about redlining and defunding education? Do we talk about the criminalization of poverty, drug use and addiction? Do we talk about toxic masculinity and misogyny? Do we talk about domestic violence, homophobia and transphobia?

Do we talk about the closing of counseling centers, barriers to reproductive health, food deserts, over policing, and lack of access to adequate healthcare? Do we talk about the damaging effects of the prison industrial complex? Do we talk about the lack of federal gun control? If not then your focus is centered on punishing violent individuals rather than fixing the conditions that gave rise to their violence in the first place. The former will contribute to punitive, unproductive conversation. The latter will do the opposite.

Trust that many of your elected officials would much rather you focus on the what than hold them accountable for the why. And believe me, the racist and guilt ridden white and nonblack folks around you feel the same way. Do not sabotage a movement that stands for you too.

-Isaiah DuPree

[kkayyspeaks-blog]

Too Brown to be Beautiful?

Recently, social media celebrity Blac Chyna launched a skin-lightening cream in collaboration with Whitenicious by Dencia.  Though marketed as an anti-aging, skin-lightening moisturizing cream, it’s really just skin bleach. Blac Chyna announced this collaboration in a extremely grand fashion, selling the life of luxury with her Instagram advertisements.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Blac Chyna (@blacchyna) on Nov 24, 2018 at 9:09am PST

Not only is the price, $250, extremely higher than the average cost of these creams, It’s particularly targeting those who think that success and fortune will come from a decrease in melanin. These products are known to be hazardous to your health and produce and continuously reproduce that idea that lighter skin is better. Mathews and Johnson (2015) give a reason for the existence of colorism, they state that this problem exists because of the “positive characteristics and traits are attributed to those with lighter skin, while those with darker complexions are frequently placed into stereotypical categories and judged severely by their physical appearance” (p. 249). Colorism is term to describe the hierarchical organization of skin tones within the same ethnic or racial group. This is a real problems because historically having a lighter skin tone presented you with “fewer societal barriers” (Mathews, T. J., & Johnson, G. S., 2015, p. 249). Having black women market these products to other black women perpetuates the problem with colorism within the back community. 

Blac Chyna promoting a product containing hazardous chemicals to obtain a lighter complexion, Blac Chyna and Whitenicious chose to release this product in a country that is currently experiencing a war against colorism. The World Health Organization found that in 2011, 77% of Nigerian women used skin lightening creams(source 1). For this product’s launch Blac Chyna and Whitenicious presented this product at a launch party in Lagos, Nigeria. The location choice for this launch is a direct marketing ploy and attack on African, BLACK, women. 

In the documentary by Undocumented World, they discuss the fight against the sell and use of these dangerous creams in South Africa. There is a sense of ostracism in South Africa to have a very dark complexion. This intraracial discrimination is present in many other cultures. I believe that this is due to the affects of European colonialism and white based class structures.  These products contains horrible chemicals that damage you skin and cause many adverse health effects, all to appear whiter.

This phenomenon is extremely harmful when it comes to the perception of one’s ability for success in romance and work. I find this to be extremely damaging to one’s self-esteem and outlook on life.

Sources:

Muzenda, M. (2018, November 30). Blac Chyna Came To Nigeria To Launch A Skin-Lightening Cream At $250 A Jar. Retrieved December 02, 2018, from https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2018/11/30/671879261/blac-chyna-came-to-nigeria-to-launch-a-skin-lightening-cream-at-250-a-jar

https://www.instagram.com/blacchyna/

World, U. (2018, January 17). Skin bleaching scandal in South Africa | Unreported World. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bWHCwXZpH6E&ab_channel=UnreportedWorld

Mathews, T. J., & Johnson, G. S. (2015). Skin Complexion in the Twenty-First Century: The Impact of Colorism on African American Women. Race, Gender & Class, 22(1/2), 248. Retrieved from http://libproxy.unm.edu/login?url=https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=edo&AN=110304782&site=eds-live&scope=site

[celebrateher]

Improving the Black Lives Matter Movement

All lives will matter when Black lives matter.

Through this blog, I will attempt to identify some ways to improve the Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement, as it operates today. We will discuss the origins of the BLM movement, fraud on the part of perverted activists within the BLM movement, the missing pieces of the BLM movement, and why the BLM movement is ineffective due to its one-dimensional nature. Juxtaposed to the Civil Rights Movement, BLM cannot even equate to the status of a legitimate movement. BLM proponents always hit the streets to protest whenever an unarmed Black person is shot and killed. What else stimulates the movement though? The BLM movement has been in existence for five years, but innocent Black people continue to lose their lives as if they mean nothing. No real change has been realized. Not only are people still being killed, but guilty police officers are not being charged or convicted at the same rate they are killing Black people.

There are many exciting things about the BLM movement. I think that in many cases, people get excited whenever protests spring up. In my personal experience, after the Parkland school shooting, my high school participated in the national school walkout. Due to safety concerns from our administration, instead of walking out, we remained in the gym for the designated fourteen-minute protest. A lot of people were upset by this. They believed the purpose of the protest had been stripped away. Conversely, I think the message of the protest was still felt despite remaining in the gym. I do not believe the location of a protest matters as long as its message is accurately portrayed. Later in the afternoon, on the same day, some very “politically driven” students initiated their own walkout. They left the school building, went outside on the sidewalk and began to protest. Before I continue with my personal anecdote, I think it is important to establish the importance of knowing who stands with you in the midst of a protest. There are many people who try to blend into a movement with the sole intention to feed on the energy a protest provides. That cold day in March, there were many people outside on the sidewalk protesting the Parkland shooting, but I do not believe they were all gun control advocates. I think many of them were drawn to the excitement of protest. They were drawn to the opportunity to skip class and be a part of something that was much larger than themselves.

I wish more people were aware of the harsh realities of the carceral state. There are many forces working against the Black family, but what are they?  To what extent do these forces work against the Black family? Where did Black oppression begin? To answer these questions, I look to Ta-Nehisi Coates, a Baltimore native and a columnist for The Atlantic. I have studied him extensively for the past month and I think it is important to analyze his work, as well as to reference it as a source to unfold the carceral state, as it engulfs the black family. Coates wrote an article in 2015, that addressed the historical failures of the American government in the support of Black men. I recently finished reading the article. I have studied it, annotated it, and written blog posts in response to the bold claims it presents. One of the key points in Coates’ article is identifying where the divide or mistrust came from between Black people and law enforcement. For me, I think it began with the release of Birth of a Nation. At the time of its release, it was an unprecedented cinematic work. The sitting president at the time, Woodrow Wilson, had an exclusive viewing in the White House. It was one of the first movie screenings in the White House. Birth of a Nation heavily criminalized the Black man. It depicted him in such a way that was animalistic and perverse. There is one particularly stirring scene in the movie, where a white woman throws herself off a cliff to avoid being raped by a Black man. I think it begins here, with the release of this movie, the widespread criminalization of the Black man. But I do not believe anyone could have been able to predict to what great extents it would expand to in coming years. The results are seen today when I walk down the street. The white response is to immediately become uncomfortable and assume I will harm them, only because I am dark and have 4c hair. Since white people fear black people so much, they will act on that fear in unsubstantiated ways, such as police brutality. As a result, Black people like myself will call into question white authority figures and Caucasians at large.

The BLM movement is lacking organization. It is also missing a prominent figure and an equivalent system to civil disobedience featured in the Civil Rights Movement. It was these three things that made the Civil Rights Movement so effective. Yet still, there were some shortcomings. The presence of a prominent figure can be both a good and a bad thing. In the case of the Civil Rights Movement, Martin Luther King, Malcolm X, and Huey Newton unified the people involved in the movement. After Dr. King’s murder, the movement did lose some traction. In the same way, the absence of a central leader in the BLM movement has its advantages and disadvantages. There are some historians who recognize BLM as a faceless movement. It is one of the reasons why it cannot be stopped. There is no one person that can be eliminated, causing the movement to stop. There is no address the police can raid. BLM is global and in some ways intangible. That is important because there is no way to stop a movement that cannot be located. However, there is an absence of a central figure that is able to “rally the troops”. There is no one person that people can look up to for inspiration.

The BLM Movement is lacking boycotts. I continue to see calls for boycotts on social media however, most of the time the great majority of BLM supporters are never upset enough to withhold their money from white businesses. If the Civil Rights Movement taught us anything, it is that true power is in the money. The bus boycott was not an overnight demonstration either, it lasted for fifteen days. It was a united effort. It was organized in such a way that everybody participated. The bus company needed to feel the absence of the Black dollar. If you revoke the Black dollar from any industry, that industry will plummet. There are many Black people that make up the middle class, which fuels America’s economy. If the Black dollar is subtracted from places like the gun industry, convenience stores, and other places involved in the genocide of Black people, I think then we will see real change. Business leaders and capitalist-driven Republicans would be forced to do something about the senseless killings of innocent Black men and women. Police killings of Black people are not the only problem facing the Black community.

The BLM movement is lacking protest of intraracial violence in the Black community. Police brutality is important, but we must also consider violence within the Black community, perpetrated by other Blacks. Black lives should not only matter when it is taken by a white police officer, but they should also matter when it is taken by another Black person. Activists within BLM movement have turned a blind eye to the intraracial violence that occurs in their communities every day. Nobody ever says anything to address this phenomenon. In many cases, these activists have become numb to the deaths of their own neighbors. That is a problem. The black community has to get away from this way of thinking. When this happens often they say, “Oh another Black person died”. That person could have easily been me or you. That is something I recognize every time I hear any news that somebody was murdered. I think it is important to consider, what if that was me that was shot and killed by my fellow brother or sister. I would want someone to care. I would want somebody to do something so that my death would not be in vain. I am not referring to retribution either. I would want guns off the streets, gangs to put aside their petty differences, and have the Black community reconciled and unified once again. I truly believe there is strength in numbers. Where there is unity there is strength. I think once Black people come back together, we will not have to worry about being oppressed from the outside anymore. That is how powerful we are as a unified force of Black people.

In its current state, the Black Lives Matter Movement is ineffective due to its one-dimensional nature. It is important to extend the movement to the issue of intraracial violence, as it pertains to the Black community. Black lives do matter, as well as Black deaths. Black deaths matter both when the perpetrator is white and when they are Black. If Black people want to see the manifestation of Black Lives Matter, they must adopt proven techniques from the Civil Rights Movement because of its success. Ideas like civil disobedience, boycotts and the presence of leading figures contributed to this success. Those same aspects need to be applied to the Black Lives Matter movement. That is how police brutality will be dismantled. That is how racist and abusive law enforcement officers will be brought to justice. When Black people are liberated, all people will be free. “For we hold these truths to be self-evident that all men are created equal”. Well, how come, my Black brother, Michael Brown laid dead in the street for four and a half hours? He lay there with a bullet lodged in his body with his blood pooled on the street. This bullet that was put there by the same man that was supposed to protect him but hated him because of the color of his skin. There have been too many times when white police officers blatantly abused their power to racially profile Black people and got away with it. It ends now with the improvement of the Black Lives Matter movement.

Thank you for reading! Hit that follow button, like and comment.