Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Locked thread
Preem Palver
Jul 5, 2007

Liberal_L33t posted:

That being said, I am willing to be the devil's advocate and say that, in the specific case of Jamaica, wanting to make a visible break with the perceived stereotypical appearance of their native culture can absolutely be an understandable, even healthy and laudable, desire. Anti-racism is a fine cause, but in cases like this, it sometimes crosses the line into essentialist, supremacist arguments about the unique value of a particular range of skin tones. It is important to remember that skin tones have no inherent value one way or the other.

So... your argument is that there is no inherent value to skin tone but Jamaicans should still strive to lighten their skin tone or otherwise appear more Anglo and less African in order to appease racist white people because otherwise Jamaicans will be valued less as individuals?

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

  • Locked thread