4 ms·

Why is that weaselly? The Hindi word for white/Caucasian is gora, "fair-skinned", and to this day many markers of high class/status in India are inherited dire

Why is that weaselly? The Hindi word for white/Caucasian is gora, "fair-skinned", and to this day many markers of high class/status in India are inherited directly from their erstwhile British rulers: speaking "proper" English, dressing in formal Western clothing, etc. Why would skin color not be one? For clarity, I'm not claiming the British created colorism, my point is just that a century of rule by them will certainly have reinforced the link between light skin and high class.

rayiner 6y ago
> The Hindi word for white/Caucasian is gora, "fair-skinned" Doesn't that suggest that the concept of distinguishing fair-skinned people? > many markers of high class/status in India are inherited directly from their erstwhile British rulers: speaking "proper" English, dressing in formal Western clothing, etc. Why would skin color not be one? Colorism existed all over the ancient world: https://quillette.com/2019/02/13/the-origins-of-colourism https://quillette.com/2019/02/13/the-origins-of-colourism. > Ancient Aztec codices in Central America revealed the use of cosmetics by women to attain a lighter skin, and paintings from ancient Egypt depicted women with lighter skin than males. In the Arab world, more broadly, one early traveller noted, “The highest praise is perhaps ‘She is white as snow.’” In North America, one Hopi chief commented, “We say that a woman with a dark skin may be half man.” The precise origins of colorism in India aren't known (some sources document colorism as early as 1500 BCE), but it would be very odd if it wasn't introduced to India until European contact in the 1500s CE, given that it existed in myriad other places in antiquity.
- 9nGQluzmnq3M 6y ago
  I'm not saying colorism was created by the British, I'm just noting that British rule reinforced it. Do you disagree? And I'm still unclear on what, exactly, about that article was "weaselly".
  - rayiner 6y ago
    I don't disagree. But this is the article's text: > It is partly a product of colonial prejudices, and it has been exacerbated by caste, regional differences and Bollywood, the nation’s film industry, which has long promoted lighter-skinned heroes. The article mentions "colonial prejudices" as the cause. It uses the caveat "partly" but doesn't mention any other origin, leaving the impression that colonialism created the prejudice, rather than reinforcing existing prejudices. It's "weasely" because it whitewashes the history of racism in India, making it seem like something that is "the product" of colonial rule.

rayiner 6y ago

> The Hindi word for white/Caucasian is gora, "fair-skinned" Doesn't that suggest that the concept of distinguishing fair-skinned people? > many markers of high class/status in India are inherited directly from their erstwhile British rulers: speaking "proper" English, dressing in formal Western clothing, etc. Why would skin color not be one? Colorism existed all over the ancient world: https://quillette.com/2019/02/13/the-origins-of-colourism https://quillette.com/2019/02/13/the-origins-of-colourism. > Ancient Aztec codices in Central America revealed the use of cosmetics by women to attain a lighter skin, and paintings from ancient Egypt depicted women with lighter skin than males. In the Arab world, more broadly, one early traveller noted, “The highest praise is perhaps ‘She is white as snow.’” In North America, one Hopi chief commented, “We say that a woman with a dark skin may be half man.” The precise origins of colorism in India aren't known (some sources document colorism as early as 1500 BCE), but it would be very odd if it wasn't introduced to India until European contact in the 1500s CE, given that it existed in myriad other places in antiquity.

9nGQluzmnq3M 6y ago
I'm not saying colorism was created by the British, I'm just noting that British rule reinforced it. Do you disagree? And I'm still unclear on what, exactly, about that article was "weaselly".
- rayiner 6y ago
  I don't disagree. But this is the article's text: > It is partly a product of colonial prejudices, and it has been exacerbated by caste, regional differences and Bollywood, the nation’s film industry, which has long promoted lighter-skinned heroes. The article mentions "colonial prejudices" as the cause. It uses the caveat "partly" but doesn't mention any other origin, leaving the impression that colonialism created the prejudice, rather than reinforcing existing prejudices. It's "weasely" because it whitewashes the history of racism in India, making it seem like something that is "the product" of colonial rule.