Zainab,"The article did not touch on the importance of understanding colorism. The article focused more on Colorism Awareness and how it is used in advertising and in the advertising industry ." --Zainab
If the article did not touch or infer the Importance of understanding, at all, you wouldn't of said this:"In this statement, following the general tone of the article, it is quite evident that the writer holds generally the same view as some others on this site. That is, the best way to start to fight colorism is by making ourselves aware of its existence." --Zainab
Which makes understanding colorism important;thats being aware; that's not distorting.
However the author implied the best way to start fight colorism in his own words, of which he concluded his article, simply:"How can we expect people to respect us and our dark-skins if we don't?""You give these ad executives too much credit. I believe that yes, they do research, but not to the depths you are relating. They do not delve into the psyche of their research subjects." --Zainab
Again I distort article because you BELIEVE they do research but not to the depths i'm relating? Based on this 'belief' gave you reason that I've distorted article giving them too much credit? Why don't you KNOW for yourself instead of believe. Email the author of the article and know for yourself."You throw around the words 'informed', 'understand' and 'know' loosely. There is nothing informed about research done for the basis of advertising. --Zainab
Either you know, understand, informed or not. One has to delve into the psyche to be informed of Colorism? how much info does one need to know in order to know 'tightly'?if these companies did/do understand colorism as you professed, then they would be easily aware of the negative effects of perpetuating this." --Zainab
So what do you think they would do if they were aware of the negative effects of perpetuating this?
especially when after you've said:"People go into business to make money. Most of them do not care about the well being of others." --Zainab"Even my words are taken out of context. What I said to you previously, does not apply here/in this instance. I asked you a straight forward question. You could choose to answer it or not." --Zainab
quyah now nuh...No one is shying away from your questions, nor treating you as beneath...
there's no need for this tone: "You could choose to answer it or not"...
You made a point about experiential gains and factual information conducive to discussion.
You ask of my beliefs, of which beliefs is not factual nor experiential. My response was not mocking
you, instead inferring that i'm not drawing from beliefs instead experiences personal and shared, including from persons in the media industry, namely film and fashion, as it relates. As well as a black dark-skinned individual trodding through the same community(Finch) as the persons documented in the link Fierytrini posted; http://shadeism.com/It is clear, even when you search the internet via key word "colorism",
information even in discussions have no mention of the "good" relating to the darker-skin....
...Yet me highlighting this is seen as trying to make colorism a none issue; something that shouldn't be discussed. I can only assume that's the reason why you and Makini have engaged my posts. (this speaks of something else that i may not get into here)" --diyouth"Your comment here is perplexing. What are you trying to convey here?" --Zainab
if, i say if, the assumption is true, ones are only interested whether someone is on 'our-side' or not; affirmations more so than reasoning/discussion...This is not necessarily a bad thing. I'm not getting into that here."I do not understand what you mean by this statement. Moreover, what in your view constitutes beauty?" --Zainab
'Self' (if i may put it that way)
a)You know you.
b)Colorism, racism, discrimination relates to what others think of you (non-self).
If you know yourself to be trustworthy how can you not look trustworthy!
If you know yourself to be a good person, how can you not be good looking?
It is most natural; even a dog 'knowing' you to be a good 'master',
your scent, sight, gives the dog, assurance, excitement, feel-good towards you.
This is beauty.
Unlike b) it doesn't care to know/experience you to see your beauty, it is only
interested in its own prejudices, biases, opinions and issues, imposed upon you; on all peoples of the earth.
Thats why to me, focusing, analyzing, intellectualizing, rationalizing, assessing,
delving into the psyche, all these things of colorism, is like trying to open a door
Once the attention is on 'self', colorism cannot be internalized. Your in a position
not only to identify colorism effectively, but by identifying it you automatically defeat it!
and what to do thereafter in a given circumstance falls into place!
This not a philosophy it is natural....
Akilah concludes we must be okay with ourselves.
Leslie concludes we must not cower to privilege and social ills
A. Crawley concludes we must respect ourselves...
...see that our beauty actually is('self')!
not just the history and break down of why and how people refuse and don't see this.