Racism and colorism (The brown paper bag and pencil tests)

Jun 18, 2017 Countryman, Features / Columnists

---

By Dennis Nichols
Three opinion pieces in the print media last week set me thinking again about a ‘little’ thing, experienced

by a lot of people because of the way they look, specifically their colour, in a gradation from black to lighter shades. Those contributions had centered on the use of the term ‘black’ to describe persons of African ancestry, in Guyana and elsewhere. Well I have no beef with black when there is a mutual understanding that it is not being used in a pejorative way. But what I do have a problem with is socially-conditioned racism, and a thing called colorism. (American spelling)
Now it isn’t that I disagree with what the main contributor, Nigel Hinds, had to say about the vile connotations of the word black and its projection onto dark-skinned people; I do up to a point, but the truth is that millions of Americans and other nationalities of African ancestry don’t seem to mind it. Even the N-word used in a certain context is akin to a compliment – a kind of reciprocating identity, for example in the way some persons casually and good-humoredly use it to refer to their friends, including non-blacks who are perceived as cool, hip, or ‘legit.’ Colorism is something else.
Basically colorism, a coined word closely related to racism, is a social construct that may have had its beginnings in the United States during slavery. It is described as ‘a process that privileges light-skinned people of color over dark in areas such as income, education, housing, and the marriage market – a persistent problem for people of color in the USA.” I daresay it’s actually a global thing, since it appears to be practised in every continent, maybe with the exception of the Polar Regions, but who knows?
American Sociology and Anthropology Professor, Margaret Hunter, narrows down the bigger problem of racial discrimination to the more hidden aspect of colorism which is concerned with actual skin tone as opposed to racial or ethnic identity. She notes that it is most pervasive among African Americans, Latinos, and Asian Americans in the United States. She then quotes several sources which conclude that lighter-skinned people of color earn more money, complete more years of schooling, live in better neighbourhoods, and marry higher-status persons than their darker-skinned kin. Then she adds this startling statement: Many people are unaware of their preference for lighter skin because that dominant aesthetic is so deeply ingrained in (our) culture. And of course that subliminal response has much to do with black’s negative associations, as with the point Mr. Hinds was making.
Professor Hunter goes on to state that ‘colorism in the USA is broadly maintained by a system of white racism. The maintenance of white supremacy … is predicated on the notion that dark skin represents savagery, irrationality, ugliness, and inferiority; white skin and thus whiteness itself is defined by the opposite: civility, rationality, beauty, and superiority. These contrasting definitions are the foundation of colorism.’
To me it is as big an issue as racism, whether covert or overt, and in some cases more pernicious, since it circulates mostly within non-white communities already perceived to be discriminated against.

But why do racism and colorism seem to be so deeply ingrained in so many cultures today? Obviously there is no straightforward ‘socio-historic’ answer, since the former is generally thought to be a fairly recent construct. (A few hundred years at most) Some persons however think the bible’s Old Testament, penned some 3000 years ago, may have started it all or helped justify it in the eyes of some Christians.
They point to scripture in the Book of Genesis; the so-called ‘Mark of Cain’ and the ‘Curse of Ham’ as biblical justification for slavery, racism implied. Then there is the quote, whether literal or metaphoric, in the Song of Solomon, “I am black but comely’ which seems to suggest that black (colour or person) is not naturally beautiful. Today there are still what I call the Black Buts, (not butts) black people who still say things like “She black, but really pretty” or “He black, but he hair nice and soft” and think they are paying a compliment. Worse yet these may be accepted as such.
A hundred more examples and background tidbits could be added to the preceding paragraphs, including what socialist thinker, Karl Marx, said about the African slave trade, European decimation of indigenous American populations, and colonialism generally contributing to the rise of capitalism; collateral racism implied. But I will just look briefly at two ridiculous practices that were once common, one up to the 1950s; the other as recent as 1994, in some non-white and mixed communities in, of all places, the United States and South Africa, and which may have bequeathed to some of us a somewhat misguided mentality related to the way we see ourselves.
The first was the ‘brown paper bag test’. Said to have originated in New Orleans, Louisiana after slavery was abolished, it started when free, light-skinned people of colour formed exclusive clubs that practically demonstrated the privilege of having skin colour closer to that of whites. During the first half of the last century, according to Wikipedia, paper bag parties took place in neighbourhoods of major American cities with a high concentration of African Americans.
The online source reported, “Many churches, fraternities, and nightclubs used the ‘brown paper bag’ principle as a test for entrance. People at these organizations would take a brown paper bag and hold it against a person’s skin. If a person was lighter or the same colour as the bag, he or she was admitted. People whose skin was not lighter than a brown paper bag were denied entry.” It added that even historically black colleges and universities (HCBUs, including Howard University) used the test as a way to critique candidates for admission. To this end some would also require applicants to send personal photographs.
In South Africa, during the apartheid era, there was a test (one of several) to determine racial identity to help distinguish whites from coloureds and blacks. Instituted by the apartheid regime, it was used to determine whether a coloured-looking person (mixed race) could be classified black or white. In this demeaning exercise, a pencil was slid into the hair of someone being ‘assessed’. If the pencil fell out – white; if it fell out with shaking – coloured; if it stuck – black. (A 1950 Population Registration Act decreed that all South Africans be categorized into one of three races – white, native, or coloured; incidentally I wonder what happened to a bald or balding individual)
These unsavoury tests may no longer be around, but they appear to have left behind a legacy – of skin bleaching, hair straightening/extending, and maybe even changing eye colour. Here in Guyana and the Caribbean, in North America, Africa, and a few other regions, beauty and acceptance are still to a large degree based on concepts advanced by white people, and on their notions of what an attractive person should look like.
In another article I will look at some of the more positive images and ideas of black – the word, the colour and the human being. In the meantime, remember that there are many persons, black, white, and of every shade in between, who are fighting (sometimes literally) to change or abolish the idea of race and all the unwelcome baggage it has carried with for centuries, maybe even millennia. Be one of them.

---

---