Insane SJW examples of bullshit "microaggressions"

May 22, 2013
5,639
4,913
Parts Unknown
Isn't it? There is a case for it being linked to the ability to go on vacation. Being tanned meant being able to leave low sunshine parts of Europe and lay out in the sun.

The working class in the UK are far more likely to use fake tan than wealthy white people.

I'm not convinced by this argument, but there's absolutely no definitive explanation for the phenomenon.

Being pale in Asia is fuck all to do with idolising caucasians, and entirely about the link to wealth in which being darker meant you worked outdoors and being rich meant you were indoors.
:deal
Anglo’s have historically judged each other harshly based upon their accent or their surname. Specifically a “smith” or a “son” or a “worth” was commonly part of a name due to your family occupation.
 
Reactions: Strike and NSFW

NSFW

Freedom Fighter
May 14, 2013
22,197
10,882
Castle Duckula.
It’s part of the caste system in India and whatever the equivalent is in China, so it’s a really old idea. Black women were being sold skin bleaching creams and hair straightening products in the US for many decades if not over a century.

This issue in the BBC item is different to the Indian caste system and other similar issues.Black women being sold skin bleaching creams is something I have heard of. I had presumed it was a beautification problem within the female population the same was all women have to use make up to try to meet a self set notion of beauty.
 
Reactions: Knox Harrington
Apr 7, 2014
4,739
1,714
The comparison is valid and interesting. It does not make it accurate. If dark skin in Asia and Africa was attached to concepts of poverty and rural, manual labour and that led to a bias of lighter skin being deemed more beautiful, than it is absolutely interesting to look at the explosion of white people viewing darker skin tones as more appealing, especially when there is a link to tanning and wealth.

As I said, I don't think it is proven, but it is easy to see how dark skin has been deemed ugly in racist, white dominated societies. It is less obvious why lighter skin has been deemed preferable in nations like Thailand and Vietnam. You didn't mention Caucasians, but that is the predominant explanation for why Asians lighten their skin. It is false, and by being false it therefore demands that the answer is given as to why the same light skin preference exists. Nobody knows for sure, but the link to outdoor and indoor labour makes absolute sense.

It then does demand that there MIGHT (and as I say it is tenuous, but worth looking at) be a link to the explosion of white people tanning with holidays in hot places being something that the wealthy can afford.

Skin lightening is definitely more damaging, pervasive and intrusive, but the origins of it are unclear, and things like the Hindu caste system have nothing to do with it. All this really shows is that humans find multiple ways to be tribal and obnoxious.
Just checked...the English royal family is still pale as shit just like almost any white English person I've seen.

Caste system: https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Skin-colour-tied-to-caste-system-says-study/articleshow/55532665.cms

There are hundreds of other articles if you don't like that one.
 
Jun 4, 2012
27,812
18,360
Just checked...the English royal family is still pale as shit just like almost any white English person I've seen.

Caste system: https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Skin-colour-tied-to-caste-system-says-study/articleshow/55532665.cms

There are hundreds of other articles if you don't like that one.
Yes, as I said the use of fake tan etc is higher in the working class, which would support the notion that poorer people are making an effort to attain a tan.

Your article doesn't say what you think it does. It says nothing about skin colour being the basis for caste, it simply states that caste contributes to keeping gene pools that influence skin tone distinct.

It also ignores environmental impacts. If you are low caste, you will work outdoors in the fields and historically that would be the case too. You could well then find that those with genes that offered protection from the sun, carried those genes onwards more successfully.

The fact is that the basis for what caste you are in is not done on skin colour. You've thrown something into a discussion, I've politely said that one example is not really accurate and you've gone off googling something to prove a point that you were not even strongly trying to make initially, because you refuse to ever say you were wrong.

Caste was not determined by skin colour. You have dark skinned people in the highest caste and light skinned people in lower castes. Even that study mentions large variation in skin tone with one of the middle castes.

Even if a correlation of skin tone and caste was definitively proven, it would simply be a chicken and egg case, as nothing in the caste system refers to skin colour and at its origins you would have educated people who would spend more time indoors (on average) in the higher castes, and because inter-caste marriages were forbidden, genetic variation within castes would be restricted.
 
Apr 7, 2014
4,739
1,714
Yes, as I said the use of fake tan etc is higher in the working class, which would support the notion that poorer people are making an effort to attain a tan.

Your article doesn't say what you think it does. It says nothing about skin colour being the basis for caste, it simply states that caste contributes to keeping gene pools that influence skin tone distinct.

It also ignores environmental impacts. If you are low caste, you will work outdoors in the fields and historically that would be the case too. You could well then find that those with genes that offered protection from the sun, carried those genes onwards more successfully.

The fact is that the basis for what caste you are in is not done on skin colour. You've thrown something into a discussion, I've politely said that one example is not really accurate and you've gone off googling something to prove a point that you were not even strongly trying to make initially, because you refuse to ever say you were wrong.

Caste was not determined by skin colour. You have dark skinned people in the highest caste and light skinned people in lower castes. Even that study mentions large variation in skin tone with one of the middle castes.

Even if a correlation of skin tone and caste was definitively proven, it would simply be a chicken and egg case, as nothing in the caste system refers to skin colour and at its origins you would have educated people who would spend more time indoors (on average) in the higher castes, and because inter-caste marriages were forbidden, genetic variation within castes would be restricted.
I never said he caste system in India was based on skin color; that’s you inventing things I said again. Skin color in India is tied to socioeconomic differences and has been forever, which ties into the caste system even if the caste system is not segregated by skin color.

White people tanning in England has no real longstanding correlation to power structure. It’s more like a fad if you’re comparing it to real examples.

And I knew you’d question the article I posted, so like I said, there are hundreds of others. Use Google.
 
Jun 4, 2012
27,812
18,360
I never said he caste system in India was based on skin color; that’s you inventing things I said again. Skin color in India is tied to socioeconomic differences and has been forever, which ties into the caste system even if the caste system is not segregated by skin color.

White people tanning in England has no real longstanding correlation to power structure. It’s more like a fad if you’re comparing it to real examples.

And I knew you’d question the article I posted, so like I said, there are hundreds of others. Use Google.
You quoted a guy saying he had not heard of discrimination based on skin tone within people of the same "race" and said "it's part of the caste system in India...".

So no, I didn't invent anything. I pointed out that the caste system has nothing to do with skin colour. If you meant "there is even a correlation between skin tone and caste on many occasions" then it wasn't clear and frankly it would be pretty irrelevant to the topic.

I don't have any issue with the article you posted, because it doesn't say anything that contradicts my point, and more importantly you are now saying you didn't mean what I thought you were saying...

I agree about the white people tanning in general, but it's a theory that many have discussed and it's not categorically false. I think it's an interesting idea, as opposed to anything concrete.
 
Jul 24, 2012
8,365
8,137
NSFW: this seems to be a new thing. Apparently the darker the skin, the sweeter the ting isn't true.

Knox: That definitely isn’t a new thing.

NSFW: I have not really heard about it.

Knox: It’s part of the caste system in India and whatever the equivalent is in China, so it’s a really old idea.

Strike: The caste system is not done by colour. But for sure it's long standing.

Knox: I never said he caste system in India was based on skin color; that’s you inventing things I said again.

:lol:
 
Apr 7, 2014
4,739
1,714
You quoted a guy saying he had not heard of discrimination based on skin tone within people of the same "race" and said "it's part of the caste system in India...".

So no, I didn't invent anything. I pointed out that the caste system has nothing to do with skin colour. If you meant "there is even a correlation between skin tone and caste on many occasions" then it wasn't clear and frankly it would be pretty irrelevant to the topic.

I don't have any issue with the article you posted, because it doesn't say anything that contradicts my point, and more importantly you are now saying you didn't mean what I thought you were saying...

I agree about the white people tanning in general, but it's a theory that many have discussed and it's not categorically false. I think it's an interesting idea, as opposed to anything concrete.
I didn’t say the ”basis” of the caste system is skin color. I said it’s “part of” the caste system because it is.

You can Google, “caste system skin color” and read all about it. If you think it has “nothing” to do with it, you should read more.
 
Jun 4, 2012
27,812
18,360
I didn’t say the ”basis” of the caste system is skin color. I said it’s “part of” the caste system because it is.

You can Google, “caste system skin color” and read all about it. If you think it has “nothing” to do with it, you should read more.
A correlation does not equate to a causation. As I already said, overlap could easily be caste as the cause and skin tone variations funnelling as the effect, rather than vice versa. In fact, everything about the origins of caste suggests this would be the case. There are powerful, high ranked members of the top caste who are dark skinned and light skinned in low castes, as your article itself stated there is variation. That's because skin is not integral to the ethos of caste, it might well be a by product, but that means that it was not intended to be a part of the deciding factors that created the system, so it's not an example of colourism.
 
Apr 7, 2014
4,739
1,714
A correlation does not equate to a causation. As I already said, overlap could easily be caste as the cause and skin tone variations funnelling as the effect, rather than vice versa. In fact, everything about the origins of caste suggests this would be the case. There are powerful, high ranked members of the top caste who are dark skinned and light skinned in low castes, as your article itself stated there is variation. That's because skin is not integral to the ethos of caste, it might well be a by product, but that means that it was not intended to be a part of the deciding factors that created the system, so it's not an example of colourism.
Go talk to some Indians then. Light skin has socioeconomic implications and it’s a very long-standing thing. That is the forest, not the trees.
 
Jun 4, 2012
27,812
18,360
Go talk to some Indians then. Light skin has socioeconomic implications and it’s a very long-standing thing. That is the forest, not the trees.
I know plenty of people of Indian heritage, and yes light skin does have socoeconomic implications, I've never said otherwise. I said it was not one of the factors that was ever used to determine caste. I am off out for the day anyway.
 
Apr 7, 2014
4,739
1,714
I know plenty of people of Indian heritage, and yes light skin does have socoeconomic implications, I've never said otherwise. I said it was not one of the factors that was ever used to determine caste. I am off out for the day anyway.
Height doesn’t determine eligibility for the NBA either.