Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

TrumpterOFyvie t1_jeble7v wrote

Reply to comment by temporarysecretary17 in TIL in the 1920s, Coco Chanel accidentally got a tan, and helped inspire the trend of sunbathing. Soon "sunlight therapy" was prescribed for almost every ailment from fatigue to tuberculosis. Before this, tanned skin was associated with the lower classes who work outside, and fair skin was revered. by Pfeffer_Prinz

Yes they existed. But not in great number and usually limited to large metropolises. English people outside of London had not mixed with black people, no. And we're not talking about the 1920's here. We're talking pre 1800's. Stop calling people dense when you have no idea what you're talking about.

6

temporarysecretary17 t1_jeblu49 wrote

Just because they hadn’t seen them doesn’t mean they didn’t know about it. Skin color was used as justification for colonialism (white mans burden).

−9

TrumpterOFyvie t1_jebnh77 wrote

But this isn't the reason for the preference of lily white Caucasian skin over tanned Caucasian skin, which is what we're talking about here. You'll note that white supremacists don't give a shit whether or not a white person has a tan or not. Just that they're Caucasian.

12

SteveBored t1_jedaad0 wrote

White man's burden was an 1800s thing. He's right, many European people prior to the 1700s probably never saw a black person in their life. People rarely traveled beyond their local villages.

5