When Did Light-Skin Sisters Become the Enemy?

Monday Mar 14, 2011 – by Britni Danielle

Recently, we received an email from one of our readers questioning the images we use on the site, and specifically, the complexion of the women in them. Apparently, this sister felt that we use images of light-skin women to accompany the majority of our articles.

She wrote:

“I have noticed that Clutch very rarely uses pictures of dark-skinned black women. I find this interesting since some of the questions on the survey dealt with the media’s uneven representation of black women. In any stock photo showing relationships, the women is always much lighter than the man.”

Although we go out of our way to feature a multitude of beautiful women—because after all, black women come in all hues—this reader felt we failed to capture the diversity of black women. In the end, she felt we were trying to play both sides of the fence—be empowering to black women, while still reinforcing that light is always right meme. She wrote, “I just find it hypocritical that you mention or highlight these issues, but perpetrate them yourselves.”

While I found this sister’s critique to be a little hyper-sensitive because we make every effort to feature ALL sorts of black women—from café au lait to deep mahogany, relaxed to natural—one question kept running through my mind while reading her email:

When did light skin sisters become the enemy?

I know, the history of colorism and discrimination is deep. But without rehashing the painful history of slavery, passing, and varying treatments people received based on skin color, you’d think that in 2011—more than 40 years after James Brown’s “I’m Black and I’m Proud” and two years after a multi-hued family moved into the White House—we’d at least be on the road to accepting that ALL black people are beautiful…no matter the skin tone.

And yet, I’ve seen it happen time and time again. If we highlight a commercial or new film that happens to feature a lighter-skinned black woman (or what some FEEL is a lighter-skinned woman), inevitably someone will chime in with, “Why did they make her so light?” or, “Why didn’t they choose a dark-skin woman?” As if light-skin black women aren’t black at all. (And before you claim my light-skin privilege is showing, kill the noise. I’d fail the paper bag test.)

So what is it? We cannot not on one hand be happy when dark skin black women get props, but have a problem when our light skin sisters are in the spotlight as well. Can we? Or are we only “empowering” black women when we showcase darker-skinned sisters?

What do you think Clutchettes and Gents? Are we doing a good job highlighting all types of black women or are we missing the mark? Sound off!

SunniSlim says:

March 16, 2011 at 2:03 pm

I’m going to have to keep it real here and say that I actually think the writer was on to something with the title of this article. Why u ask??? Because I’ve asked myself that exact same question. I am a light-skinned AA woman from a MGM family as many of us are. I have 4 whole siblings and we are all different shades w/me the lightest. Growing up my family never talked about light skin/dark skin but outside the home is where I learned this complex existed. Of course growing up I’ve experienced all the tragic mulatto situations but I’ve learned to manuver through and create my own space. As a grown woman my heart has become sadden w/the increasing negative rift I feel n see between us black women. Who are these horrible light-skinned women that some people want to perceive me as no matter how “nice” I have learned to be so that I am not judged negatively. I want to be accepted and love by my people just as my darker sisters are. But keepin ii real I just don’t feel the love back that I try to give.

↑ Reply

Alexandra says:

March 16, 2011 at 9:04 pm

I’m thrown off by the title.

Despite this ever going, dead-ended topic, I’m surprised many of commenter’s are dismissing the emailers letter, because it’s not an important issue. It kinda contradicts lots of other comments posted on here. Some of you trying to shove away an issue that has been going on for years? Silencing it, wont make it go away.

Its no different from people saying lighter skinned women shouldn’t have an opportunity to talk/participate in certain things because they are presumed to not be affected/not black or dark enough?

I personally think Clutch has done a good job at showcasing all colors/shapes of Black women and hope they continue doing so. Never mind the constant “overweight” woman bashing.

Some of these comments remind me of the comments on your other article Brittni. I’m confused on your stance. How is ignoring Asian-hate different from ignoring colorism?

omgfantastic says:

March 18, 2011 at 9:53 am

clutch: “While I found this sister’s critique to be a little hyper-sensitive because we make every effort to feature ALL sorts of black women…”

—————————————

sometimes i wish the folks at clutch would think a little harder and be more thoughtful when responding to questions/queries/comments. at times you just don’t come across the journalists you claim to be. you come across as bitchy and dismissive. it’s one thing for me to be like that, but you should be staying above the fray, imo.

calling a reader hyper-sensitive is pretty ridiculous, no? i would imagine if she actually paid to read clutch, she would have canceled her subscription. i know i would have.

rather than replying in a way that really isn’t befitting someone who runs an online publication with aspirations (i imagine) to do great things, you could have submitted a more intelligent response.

the only response you should be giving is, “we try to do our best and we will continue to make every effort to be inclusive because we understand how important this is to our readers and to the black community at large. thanks for your comments and taking the time to read and respond to clutch. we value your input.”

is it at all possible that the reader has a point?

did you go back and look at your issues from the last three months and ascertain the legitimacy of the comment? i mean, we all have to reflect on things at times. if i submitted a letter to The New York Times commenting on the paucity of blacks in certain kinds (noncriminal) of stories, would it be okay to call me hyper-sensitive? or should the paper actually go through their issues and look at what their coverage has actually been?

sometimes we may have the best intentions, but do the opposite on a subconscious level. so you may make every effort, but is that the actual end result? the reader who submitted the comment doesn’t seem to think so. once someone (on coco and creme) defended using photos of the likes of amber (kanye’s ex) by saying she looks her mother…

and also, my guess is the writer of this article is an indignant light-skinned black woman. i would love to see pics of the core editorial staff of clutch.

btw, i’m a former reporter. i understand very well how publications come together. i’ve had these types of conversations in newsrooms. you can ban me from you site, but i can’t be hosed….lol…

britni danielle says:

March 18, 2011 at 2:03 pm

@omgfantastic

thanks for your thoughtful comment. you points are very valid…

one point of clarification. you said…”at times you just don’t come across the journalists you claim to be.”

we do not claim to be journalist, at least i don’t. I’m a writer. sure, we share/report the news of the day, but it is almost always filtered through the lens of the writer’s POV as a woman/black woman.

also, you lost me at “and also, my guess is the writer of this article is an indignant light-skinned black woman.”

isn’t this jumping to the same conclusion that i did when i said i felt the reader was being a bit “hyper-sensitive”? moreover, i made it a point to say i was not light-skinned & even linked to my picture.

either way…i appreciate you & everyone else for taking the time to read and comment. what i love most about writing for Clutch is the dialogue we engage in and the various POVs that get expressed.

Jan says:

March 20, 2011 at 7:28 am

“I know, the history of colorism and discrimination is deep. But without rehashing the painful history of slavery, passing, and varying treatments people received based on skin color, you’d think that in 2011—more than 40 years after James Brown’s “I’m Black and I’m Proud” and two years after a multi-hued family moved into the White House—we’d at least be on the road to accepting that ALL black people are beautiful…no matter the skin tone.”

I am in no way trying to create an excuse for or justify division within the black community. But really think about the impact that slavery has had on our community. You say 40 years after James Brown’s “I’m Black and I’m proud”, but what about 400 years of slavery. The civil rights movement is still fairly recent compared to 400 years of slavery.

Not to repeat myself but think about it. This stuff has been ingrained into our very core for over 400, FOUR HUNDRED, years

A song about black pride and a black family moving into the white house isn’t gonna just clean things up like it never happened.

I know how you feel though. I really do. I think colorism is ridiculous and that people should just grow up, but then I stop and think about the damages that have been done to us for over 400 years and then I find myself being a little more patient with people or just ignoring them if they want to get crazy.

snickerz says:

March 21, 2011 at 9:43 am

I was thinking the same thing when she mentioned “I’m Black & I’m Proud” & things that happened in the 20th/21st century & COMPLETELY forgot about the very root of the issue. smh..

lee says:

March 21, 2011 at 1:22 pm

i totally think the comment/critique was totally taken out of context. when she says dark-skinned, i’m assuming she means DARK as in Alec Wek dark (btw, she has a point! i rarely see sisters as dark as alec wek featured on any form of media and it is SAD!). she has a right to voice her opinion and i’m angry for her about the way that it was handled. why can’t women voice their opinions about color without being labeled divisive, insecure or simply as hating on our light-skinned sisters. it’s disgusting. i’m so over these discussions and the finger pointing. it would have been better to just write this sister back saying that you’d work harder to be more inclusive and leave it at that…. maybe even doing a post highlighting the beauty of hues that are deeper and richer than say Nia Long. damn!

March 21, 2011 at 1:37 pm

btw… i love how the second part of the critique/comment was ignored by the writer. i personally think that would be a more interesting conversation…