Newly Natural often addresses the discrimination that kinky hair receives on a regular basis. It seems to be an acceptable thing to put down the natural texture of African American hair. It seems that one can use the terms “good hair” and “bad hair” with little to no repercussions.
I remember thinking how odd it was that it was ok to blatantly tell someone that their hair was “too” nappy, but skin color seemed to be off limits. Our skin and hair textures are both something that we can not control, that are assigned to us at birth. Yet, when it gets down to it, it’s more socially acceptable to go for the hair than the skin. Is it because most AA women relax their hair? I have no idea.
Skin tones may not be discussed as openly, but the undercurrents are still there.
In my experiences, I have heard it discussed more openly. Some of you may or may not recognize the term “color struck”. From urban dictionary:
When an African American is attracted to a lighter complexion African American exclusively. In spite of what their own complexion may be.
Also “colorstruck”:
To have an aversion to someone’s skin color; usually used in the African-American community, especially in the Southern U.S
As I’ve said before, I work with infants. African American infants, especially premature ones, can be born with lighter skin that will darken as they get older. You would not believe (I say you wouldn’t believe, because I can’t believe it sometimes!) the number of parents who come in squabbling over the child’s skin color.
Scenario #1:
Baby is born and significantly lighter than both parents due to prematurity. Mom shakes her head and says sheepishly : “I don’t know where he got that pretty color and hair from, he didn’t get it from me or his daddy”
I am always momentarily stunned when I hear something like this. First, I’m surprised that people think that the baby’s hair is going to stay that way. I mean, I was born with practically straight hair (a lot of AA babies are). It certainly ain’t straight now. Is this just not common knowledge?
Second, the skin color changing may not be as well known to someone who’s not around infants that much, but why does it have to “pretty” because it’s not as dark as the parents?
Scenario #2:
Mom walks in a sees her baby for the first time. “Ooooh she’s so light! Is she going to stay that way?” The nurse shows her the baby’s ears, which are about two shades darker than the baby, a tad darker than mom.
“She’ll get a bit darker. Maybe about that color” the nurse reassures her.
“Oh Lord!” the Mom exclaims and frowns.
I swear to you this happens. And it happens often. Both scenarios.
And these moms are not older women either, but from the teens to early 20s.
“Colorstruck” was a term that I grew up with. Granted, I live in the deep South and I feel that it’s more prevalent here. But I suspect that it exists all over on differing levels.
If you have noticed, I have a caramelish skin tone. My mother was much darker (deep chocolate) than me and made sure that I knew as a young child that my skin color did not make me better or worst than any one else. Nor did anyone’s skin being lighter than mine make them better or worst. She’d spent a lot of time around activists and I think it was important to her that I did not grow up with a lot of the same ideas she did.
However, when I went out in the world, to school, to church, it was a different story. It’s the bitter and sad truth that light skinned AAs are treated differently by other AAs. My own grandmother, whom I loved to death, would refer to people as “ugly as sin and black as tar”.
This of course stems from the days of slavery, when the slaves created their own divisions based on hair texture and skin color. Fast forward to our more liberated days and there are still paper bag parties at AA colleges in the 1960s.
In case you don’t know what a paper bag party is (From the wikipedia):
From 1900 until about 1950 in the larger black neighborhoods of major American cities, “paper bag parties” are said to have taken place. Some organizations used the “brown paper bag” principle as a test for entrance. People at many churches, fraternities and nightclubs would take a brown paper bag and hold it against a person’s skin. If a person was lighter or the same color as the bag, he or she was admitted. People whose skin was not lighter than a brown paper bag were denied entry.
Fast forward to our modern, more enlightened time and we still have these goingons. The following is from an NPR article called “For Light Skinned Only?”:
The “Light Skin Libra Birthday Bash,” which was to take place at Detroit’s Club APT, was the brainchild of a self described “dark-skinned” African-American Detroit DJ and party promoter. The party was intended to let “light-skinned” black women into a downtown club for free. In his defense, Ulysses “DJ Lish” Barnes, said that he had plans for “Sexy Chocolate” and “Sexy Caramel” parties too. The good news is that the parties have been canceled after much criticism and calls for boycotts and lawsuits.
Also:
More recently there was the University of Georgia’s 2006 controversial study on skin tone which confirmed that light-skinned blacks are often more likely to be considered for jobs over dark-skinned blacks.
Wrap it all together and what you get a classic example of Dr. Joy DeGruy-Leary’s P.T.S.S., otherwise known as post-traumatic slave syndrome.
You know, I can’t think of one time that I witnessed or heard of white children taunting each other for being paler than the next, but I can think of numerous occasions where I have seen black children teasing each other for being “too black.”
And while our lighter skin shades can be attributed to the Massuh’s preference for his female black slaves over his own wife, we can’t blame the Massuh for us continuing to feed into the hype that light is good and dark is bad.
Truer words were never spoken.
So what’s the point of this blog post? I have no idea. It upsets me about natural hair being scorned, but this upsets me too because it is yet another form of self hatred. I know a lot of people might say that we are beyond this, and I can only speak for my neck of the woods, but it’s not. It’s still alive. It’s swept under the rug more than hair discrimination, but that doesn’t meant it’s not as deeply ingrained.
Chime in! Is this a big deal where you live? Is Kcurly overreacting?
{ 22 comments }













