Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

SeiCalros t1_jec9u8d wrote

Reply to comment by Daniel_The_Thinker 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

i dont know if i can dumb this down for you any more but - if you have two things? and one is a subset of the other? THAT IS AN INTRINSIC ASSOCIATION

if there was no 'colorism' there would be no white supremacy - colorism is THE intrinsic and inextractible quality of white supremacy that distinguishes it from other ethnic discrimination

−3

Daniel_The_Thinker t1_jecan9v wrote

But that isn't what white supremacy is, you idiot.

White supremacy is a racial belief system, it has nothing to do with variation in pigment WITHIN an ethnic group and honestly not inextricably linked with pigment at all, considering the anglo Saxon white supremacists targeted the Irish (whiter than them) as an inferior race.

If one brother becomes a merchant and works inside all day while another becomes a poor farmer, they're not looking down on the farmer because of his color, they are looking down on him because he is a farmer, and the color just outs him as one. They're the same "white race"

2

SeiCalros t1_jecsoqg wrote

>But that isn't what white supremacy is, you idiot.

ah yes forgive me for being such an idiot to have developed the misconception that white supremacy was somehow related to skin colour 🤡

>considering the anglo Saxon white supremacists targeted the Irish

really? tell me professor history 🤡 how long did that last 🤡🤡

seems in retrospect there may have been some quality the irish had that inhibited the persistency of that categorism

too bad its nothing obvious 🤡

0