Old but important (and depressing to watch), the famous Doll Tests:
Really, all other aspects of decolonization would follow spontaneously if we thoroughly decolonized how people perceive the world. But this is the hardest one. I have even encountered people who on the conscious level sincerely want to stop being Eurocentric, but are unable to do so on the subconscious level.
'This is so white!' Miss India pageant comes under fire for having 'no dark skin' beauty queens among the 'identically' pale finalists ... The organisation came under fire after a newspaper published headshots of all 30 women competing to take home the crown.
Twitter user LeBrown James shared a photo of the collage, asking: 'What's wrong with this picture?'
The question sparked dozens of responses from social media users who pointed out that all the women have 'fair skin', with one saying simply: 'This is so white!'
This is what it means to be psychologically colonized.
(On a different note, I have also noticed a rarity of short hairstyles among female Indian celebrities, which I also consider to reflect lack of self-confidence. In the pageant above, for example, if only one contestant had been willing to cut her hair short, her look would have instantly stood out from everyone else's and showed she deserved to win. And yet none of them chose to do so. Why not?)
Self-confident women who are more feminine to begin with can be expected to pursue a look that emphasizes femininity. Similarly self-confident women who are less feminine to begin with, on the other hand, would by the same logic pursue a look that de-emphasizes femininity. The same is true for men and masculinity. Lack of self-confidence is revealed when less feminine/masculine women/men try to compensate by ultra-emphasizing femininity/masculinity respectively, no differently than when darker-skinned people try to lighten their skin.
In any society, there will be more self-confident people and less self-confident people as a matter of statistical distribution. This on its own would be, and has been throughout history, tolerable. The problem from the colonial era onwards is that, due to Eurocentrism, the lack of self-confidence goes all one-way, whether the parameter be pigmentation, sexual dimorphism, height or any other. For example, where are the insecure light-skinned people who try to darken their skin? They virtually don't exist. (Guess why not.)
And parents (as always) make things even worse:
colourism often starts from birth, where parents favour the children with lighter skin.
Mexican Magazines Are Way Whiter Than The Actual Mexican Population
Dark-skinned individuals make up — at maximum — 20 percent of the people shown in these 15 magazines. ... Quién, a society magazine, was the whitest in our analysis: only 2 percent of the people in its pages were brown or black.
None of the people on the covers of the magazines we looked at have dark skin. ... When dark-skinned Mexicans do appear on magazine pages, they tend to be in stories about philanthropy, charity events or travel.
In Esquire, the only two dark-skinned Mexicans in the issue appeared in content about an entrepreneurship program.
In Vanity Fair México, we found only one indigenous child in content about an educational charity, and three other dark-skinned Mexican people at an event with the president and first lady of Mexico.
In Quién, Indigenous activist Eufrosina Cruz is one of the few dark-skinned people in the magazine and appears dressed in traditional Zapotec clothing.
In Vanidades, the only dark-skinned people in the issue are three Indigenous people in a story on the celebration of Day of the Dead in Spain.
In Marie Claire México, the majority of the dark-skinned people appear in a photo feature about Havana, Cuba.
The rest of the brown and black people appearing in the magazines are non-Mexican celebrities or political figures, like Beyoncé and Barack Obama.
The article tries to blame the magazine editors, but I would say that editors are just pragmatically doing whatever helps to sell their magazines. Supply follows demand. The real problem lies with the consumers, who are still traumatically mindfucked from the colonial era. Change how the consumers view the world, and the magazine photos will change by themselves as a consequence of market forces.
Uppal has been studying the effects of Disney princesses on girls internationally since 2009. In a world where Disney's TV channels are broadcast in 133 countries, and its films and merchandise pervade even more, she wanted to see how girls of different nationalities perceived the idea of a princess.
Between 2009 and 2018, she asked nearly 140 girls to draw a princess. They were ages 8 to 15 and lived in five countries — the U.S., China, Fiji, India and Sweden. She then conducted private, 10-to-15-minute interviews with each girl, with questions like, "Who is a princess?" and "What age did you start watching Disney princess films?" and "Do you think you could be a princess?" Most girls said they had been watching Disney films since before they could remember.
Her latest study, published in March in the journal Social Sciences, analyzed 63 princess drawings from girls in Fiji, India and Sweden. In this sample, nearly every drawing — 61 out of 63 — depicted a light-skinned princess, many of those resembling Disney characters. Fijian girls drew multiple Ariels; Indian girls drew Belles and Sleeping Beauties. Not one girl drew a princess in her country's traditional garb.
"We didn't say, 'Draw a Disney princess.' We said, 'Draw a princess,' " Uppal says. "In India, they didn't draw a single girl in a sari, or in Fiji a sulu chamba [traditional Fijian garb]."
Additionally, some girls from non-Western nations — India, Fiji and China — said in their interviews with Uppal that they could not be a princess because their skin was too dark and they were not beautiful enough. ... Since the introduction of Jasmine in 1992, four young women of color have been added to the company's official princess lineup: Pocahontas, Moana, Tiana and Mulan.
"The newer princesses of color have definitely expanded the vision of what constitutes a princess," Hains says.
But Uppal says her report would indicate that this new wave of diverse princesses "has not replaced images of popular white princesses in Disney that have a much older and global presence." Most girls surveyed preferred the "classic," white princesses to Mulan and Jasmine. ... Of course, Disney is not solely responsible for white and Western notions of beauty: Both Fiji and India were colonized for many decades, ingraining the concept of whiteness-as-beauty before Disney products ever reached their shores. But Uppal's findings show that Disney may bolster these notions, Hains says.
"It's another data point that reinforces these stereotypes and harmful beliefs about who's good enough and who can be considered beautiful."
One reason why the girls prefer the "classic" princesses is because Disney itself added the "diverse" princesses purely for the sake of "diversity", not because it genuinely felt inspired by them. And the girls can sense this:
Asked by Uppal about the origins of princesses like Jasmine and Mulan, a number of girls in India and Fiji maintained these princesses were "American," not from the Middle East or China as the movies portray.
They can tell the difference between authentic characters and PC quota characters, and will understandably feel uncomfortable with the latter. The very need for Disney to quota-insert precisely one princess of each "non-white" ethnicity, amidst a conspicuous supermajority of "white" princesses, sends an obvious signal that the "non-white" princesses have nothing to offer beyond ethnic tokenism, whereas the "white" princesses are the ones that - PC aside - Disney actually wants to feature. The girls interviewed are merely picking up on this patronization.
What Disney should have is 0% of its princesses from Old World fairytales, and 100% of its princesses from New World fairytales. We do not care about "diversity". We care about rejecting Eurocentrism.
Post by luciferoverzion on Jun 13, 2019 0:39:59 GMT
If you're a 'mixed' man, the 'non-white' partner could fetishize you for having 'white traits'... You're as white as she could possibly get! The 'white' woman could think that you fetish her and starts acting her princess complexes up..
A teacher at an English-language daycare in Kitakyushu, Japan, was filmed allegedly hitting, grabbing, throwing and abusing small children. A co-worker secretly filmed the Canadian teacher appearing to mistreat the students on several occasions. The teacher was suspended for misconduct, but no charges have been filed yet.
Also, WTF does "filmed allegedly hitting..." mean? It's already on film FFS!
The irony at the end when they talk about how they have now learned to be proud of how they look, even though most of them have dyed hair.....
And let's be honest: by absolute standards, they are ugly. What makes them psychologically colonized is that they think it's their "non-whiteness" making them ugly, when in reality it is their bad genes. The solution is not to tell them they are beautiful (as many False Left commenters attempt to) because that is just untrue. The True Left solution is to teach them to start noticing the obvious: that most "whites" are just as ugly (if not more so).
The following is what goes on inside Eurocentric minds. When you tell them to imagine a generic "white" person, they automatically imagine an aesthetically idealized "white" person. Whereas when you tell them to imagine a generic [insert "non-white" ethnicity here] person, they automatically imagine an aesthetically mediocre [insert "non-white" ethnicity here] person. In other words, they let an idealized stereotype represent their image of "whites" in general, and mediocre stereotypes represent their image of "non-whites" in general. Once this double-standard is in place, then when they see average/below-average "white" people in real-life, they perceive merely flawed versions of the idealized "white" stereotype (therefore still fundamentally beautiful in their minds). Whereas when they see above-average "non-white" people in real-life, they perceive either merely upgrades of the mediocre [insert "non-white" ethnicity here] stereotype (therefore still fundamentally ugly in their minds), or - worse - partial resemblance to the idealized "white" stereotype (therefore beautiful in their minds, but only because they "look white"(!!!), instead of realizing that the beauty comes from resemblance to the ideal, not resemblance to the "whiteness", and it is Eurocentrism which spuriously superposed the "whiteness" over the ideal inside their own minds).
They often are not consciously aware of this. What we are here to do is help people first become conscious of this, and then get rid of this conditioned perception.
The AP’s six-year veteran White House reporter Darlene Superville has triggered a backlash in Africa and drawn the ire of many on Twitter after referring to South Africa President Cyril Ramaphosa as an “unidentified leader.” ... “Compounding the blooper, she's a black woman who recognizes white men from their backs, not black men's faces…” ... Superville then tweeted the same pictures again some 18 hours after the tweetstorm began, without apology, leaving countless irate South Africans fuming.
Does the reverse ever happen? Why not? (We all know why not.....)
In Mexico there are many begger children, kids who beg on the streets for money. Everyone is aware of them, and no one does anything, they just pass by them on their car. One day a blonde haired girl was photographed on the streets begging for change, a guy took a photo of her, and the Mexican media went into a frenzy trying to "rescue" her. After everything was settled she was given donations.
I'm not saying this particular girl should not have received charity, of course. But should not all the other beggar children also receive charity from those willing to help this girl? What the fuck is going on inside people's heads? (Answer: Eurocentrism.)
Again, a "white"-looking child in poverty was caught on camera and the media instantly freaked out. As if "non-white" children in poverty is no big deal, but a "white" child in poverty is an emergency that requires instant investigation (including DNA testing!).
More than three-quarters of Puerto Ricans identified as white on the last census, even though much of the population on the island has roots in Africa. That number is down from 80% 20 years ago, but activists and demographers say it is still inaccurate and they are working to get more Puerto Ricans of African descent to identify as black on the next census in an effort to draw attention to the island’s racial disparities.
All residents of Puerto Rico can select “Yes, Puerto Rican” on the census to indicate their Hispanic origin. But when it comes to race, residents must choose among “white,” “black,” “American Indian,” multiple options for Asian heritage, or they can write something in. Most Puerto Ricans choose “white.” ... Bárbara I. Abadía-Rexach, a sociology professor at the University of Puerto Rico and a member of Colectivo Ilé, was shocked when she learned how many Puerto Ricans identified as white on the last census. ... “There are people that don’t want to use the word black because they think it’s an insult, and there is still that idea that we need to ‘better the race,’” Abadía-Rexach said, referring to mejorar la raza, a popular saying in Latin American countries that suggests light skin is more desirable than dark skin.
And the punchline:
Centuries ago, a policy known as gracias al sacar allowed black Puerto Ricans with mixed racial heritage to petition Spain to be reclassified as white for a fee.
Does this work the other way round? No. Why not? Eurocentrism.
"Whites" in formerly colonized countries get all kinds of special favours for being fluent in the local language (on top of the favours they already get just for being "white"), whereas "non-whites" in former colonial powers are expected to be fluent in the local language just to be barely tolerated.
The underlying message is that the colonized feels flattered that the colonizer deigned to learn the local language, which is a self-declaration of subservience, which is why it only happens one way round. This subservient mentality is what we are here to end.