‘Nude’ Actually Means ‘the Color of a White Person’s Flesh’?
Via Amy Odell at Buzzfeed, “Rihanna’s Nude Perfume Meant To Recall ‘Glistening’ Skin”:
After Rihanna tweeted the first photo from the new campaign for her latest fragrance Nude, it raised the question that comes up every so often about what “nude” means, exactly, in terms of a shade of commercial fashion and beauty items. Why does nude, by definition, match a white person’s skin? In this Nude fragrance ad and packaging, the nude color is more akin to a white person’s skin than person of color’s.
She’s right. Here’s Merriam Webster with a definition in need of a revision:
a : devoid of a natural or conventional covering; especially :not covered by clothing or a drape
b (1) : of the color of a white person’s flesh (2) : giving the appearance of nudity <a nude dress>
Laura Beck at Jezebel seems to recognize something wrong but fails to adequately articulate the real cultural conflict in play:
I will say, I’m sure there are many people who don’t know that “nude” refers to the color of a white person’s flesh, maybe they think it just means “naked.” But even with that explanation — what’s with the light-colored lingerie? And why isn’t the color of the packaging darker? If they were referring to Rihanna naked, which, WILD GUESS, I think they might be, then why are all the components so damn white?
Am I nuts for expecting a leeetle better from Rihanna? I know the answer is yes, but I thought maybe she was a little more thoughtful about shit based on what she tweeted back to that idiot who asked why her hair was nappy: “cuz I’m black bitch!!!!” That was rad.
Why the reference to Rihanna’s hair in a story complaining about her new perfume’s name and packaging?
Because there’s a cultural civil war happening right now over hair, beauty, and race. The question: should black and multi-racial women continue investing tens of thousands of dollars each year on artificial hair “weaves” and damaging chemical straighteners so they can imitate the style of Caucasian women? Should they adopt unnatural looks like the blonde Rihanna in the ad above?
Or would they appear more beautiful embracing the styles the rising “natural hair movement” advocates?
I don’t understand the thinking of any man who would assert that black and biracial women need to make themselves look more Caucasian in order to become attractive. Should any dare to defend themselves for the demands they place on the women they claim to love, then I welcome their justifications in the comments below. Would any man do so with his real name?
****
More on race at PJ Lifestyle:
WHY DO YOU CARE?!
Why do you troll me?
I think it’s a fair question. Why do you care about this? This is pulled straight out of the pages of People magazine at best.
If “we” care so strongly about the color of Rihanna’s undergarments in her latest advertising campaign, where are we drawing the line past which actions are too trivial to merit our attention?
This is the kind of thing one tells the “usefuls” to care about.
Why do I care if black and multiracial girls and women are culturally indoctrinated with the lie that they’re ugly and can only be beautiful if they waste ridiculous amounts of money and time to look like Barbie dolls? Is that the “fair question” that you think I didn’t answer already in my post?
Trolls come to PJM early and always spoiling for a fight – the subject matter doesn’t matter. They are on Progressive guard duty and rush out to meet anything that may, however tangentially, challenge their world view and feelings of superiority.
You really need to learn the meaning of the word, “troll”.
HINT: It’s not somebody who disagrees with you.
So where was the disagreement? The trolls objected to the fact that he wrote about it at all. Typical.
Please enroll in the nearest English comprehension class.
If there is such a thing as a naked singularity, perhaps we can do some kind of a semantic trade off or transference and call black holes “nude holes.”
It doesn’t really make any sense to me but I’m sure it would be smiles all around to a liberal.
Maybe “honky holes.”
All I care about is this: Who does she vote for and who does she contribute money to?
There’s more to life than politics.
Do black women have to have straightened hair to look better to white men? Dude, it is more to appeal to black men than to white men. Don’t you know that?
Women are fiercely competitive for the men, so they make themselves up to be more physically appealing. Personally, I would rather the women spend their time and money on becoming more lady-like, rather than whore-like. The physical appeal is the bait, but it’s what’s inside that is the hook. Men do not pump and dump ladies. They pump and dump whores.
I’ve had candid conversations with a lot of women (admittedly, mostly white and hispanic women) about appearance. In almost every case, they told me that they cared much more about what other women thought of their appearance than how attractive they were to men. These women were very competitive against one another, and this was done with the goal of holding dominance over the other young women.
Of course they’s never lie* to you about something like that, now would they?
* – okay, maybe lie is a harsh word. Considering the context, maybe I should say, ahem, shade the truth?
Bingo.
To mark at end of #1 thread. Thanks for making my point by throwing an irrelevant insult at me just because you got caught making a dumb observation. Reading comprehension has nothing to do with it – but self awareness does.
Of course, if their attempt to be “competitive” with other women didn’t have the ancillary benefit of also being attractive to men also, they would adopt a different strategy.
Regardless, why shouldn’t they be allowed to dress and “torture” their hair in any way they choose? Surely the tenants of freedom and personal liberty dictate that they be allowed to do so, regardless of how any of us feel about it.
Full disclosure, I am a white guy in my forties, and I think Rihanna looks hot with blond hair.
TENETS, not “tenants”!!!!!
(Sorry, but that one drives me nuts every time I see it.)
You are absolutely correct!
My bad.
BJP
I agree that the natural hair looks best on black women, but that’s my opinion as a white woman. I think it just looks “off” to see them in something that mimics what it’s not. But then, I also slightly envy the range of things their different textured hair can do that mine never can without an equally long and painful amount of torture with chemicals at a salon. And I’m being totally honest when I say that. It’s beautiful in its own way.
Personally, I do not understand why natural vs. chemically straightened hair has become such a hot button topic. Women of other ethnicities dye, straighten, cut, etc. their hair to suite their own tastes. Why can’t a black woman choose a hairstyle that makes her personally feel beautiful like women of other races?
Btw, I am a black women. Even before I got my relaxer, I pressed my hair straight not because I am ashamed of my heritage, but because I personally prefer my hair straight.
“I personally prefer my hair straight.”
Why?
That is a loaded question that I will try to answer both as it pertained to me and to the black community as a whole.
For me personally, I’ve worn my hair straight for as long as I can remember. My mother started blow drying/pressing my hair when I was 3.5 years old (fyi, these processes use only heat, water will revert the hair back to its natural texture). Combing out my hair in its natural state would reduce me to tears, so I learned to prefer my hair straight. Also, the women of my mother’s side have wonderful hair textures that are silky when straight. I love the silky movement of my hair when its straight. I started relaxing my hair at 14 because I wanted to be like my black peers. In all honesty, if I could, I would never have gotten a relaxer because its more trouble than its worth, but I would still press my hair straight. I especially despise those trying to
Withing the AA community, there is an internal distinction made between n@#$$%& and black folks. The former group consists of the ghetto hoodlums glorified on MSM. The latter group is upwardly mobile, middle class+ professionals. “Black” folks are very concerned about being perceived by other races as being the same as the thuggish trash of the former group; one way to make the distinction is through presentation. Professional, white collar blacks can be very particular about what clothes they wear, their hairstyles, residence, cars and even speech for this very reason. Even though black clothing labels (i.e. Rocawear, Baby Phat, etc.) can cost just as much, if not more, than non-black labels, blacks of this group will not allow themselves or their children to wear ethnic brands. Why? Because it looks ghetto. Indeed, my own parents allowed me to buy one pair of FUBU jeans and those jeans were very plain. Hair is just another form of presentation. How many black accountants, doctors, lawyers, etc. do you see wearing cornrows, dreadlocks and full out afros? Not very many. Again, the reason is to distance themselves from being perceived as ghetto. Take a look at pictures of the Obamas before the presidency and you will see my point.
I am sorry if I was defensive in my previous post. I just am rather sensitive to what I perceive as others trying to push conform blacks to their standards of “blackness,” instead of allowing the individual to decide their own standard. I dislike just as much when Al Sharpton, Essence and other black media/leaders try to push the same agenda (incidently, this is a major reason why Republicans have trouble in the AA community).
Kaila, I could not thank you enough for the perspective that you have brought to this discussion. As a white man who grew up in a mixed neighborhood in an Eastern town,, I was fortunate to attend an integrated school system (in the 50′s). Just as you describe, there was a clear distinction between the AA’s who wanted to make something of their lives and those who were content to cruse in the same impoverished state as their families. The difference between then and now is that there were families, indeed extended families and the idea of out-of-wedlock births was anathema. My particular high school class (1960)has turned out to be rather cohesive and we have periodic reunions which are well attended by both races. There are no issues. The AA’s that attend, and there are many, have accomplished as much in their lives as have the white folks and we celebrate each others’ successes.
My observation from the perspective of living in Calif. and from many years later is that the “conflict” that you describe between being perceived as ghetto and being perceived and indeed living a normal American life is everywhere. Unfortunately, it seems that the ghetto image has developed a cache in both the Black community and indeed, among many white kids. My son, who loved Hip Hop and who dressed in baggy pants until I put my foot down was an example. He outgrew the image although he still loves the music.
These issues are much larger than processed hair. I celebrate the ever enlarging AA middle class, the professionals and the families that are just as normal as normal white families in all their variations including successes and failures. My heart is pained, however, when I encounter the thuggish image that is so prevalent among Black youth, whether on the street, on the bus or at a sporting event, I cringe a bit because I see absolutely no future for that image and I can only hope they will outgrow it in time.
Disturber
Kaila, you’re a breath of fresh air. Physical identifiers of race do not matter. Culture matters. I’m Caucasian and I reject and discriminate against anything associated with black ghetto/gangsta culture. I also reject and discriminate, as do many other Caucasians, against anything that smacks of what might be called “white-trash culture.” Those discriminations and rejections do not make me a racist in either direction, even though there is heavy overlap between blackness and black ghetto/gangsta culture and between whiteness and white-trash culture. This is a point that cannot be stressed too often in this age of the easy condemnation of “racism.”
How black female hair styles figure into this, I’m not sure. A black female who wants to join and ease her way through the dominant U.S. culture certainly shouldn’t adopt a hairstyle -or any other style – that smacks of the ghetto. Anything else is her business.
Kaila, thanks for contributing your perspective. All the women I know dress according to a kind of social class consciousness or, if you wish, job-awareness consciousness, and by “dress” I include hair style. I’m retired now, but when I was still working I and the other people I knew dressed for our jobs. To get ahead and to be effective on the job, you have to look appropriate in your particular workplace. To be effective in a university classroom (my former place of work), you have to look and act like a professor. The first step in establishing your authority as a professor for your students is to start by walking into the classroom and looking like the teacher, rather than the student. It is the same in all jobs and professions. It is no big deal and I think Swindle is quite wrong to turn a person’s choice of hair style into a political matter. Isn’t that what the political-correctness-czars do?
Jidkat, I agree with your dislike of whitetrash. I really hate it that Discovery Channel has taken itself and its many other channels in the direction of glorifying “white trash” with all the programs catering to extreme weird beards, hairstyles and really offensive tattoos, trying to make them seem mainstream. I am also offended by the TV shows featuring ordinary regular-guy black guys but all the women look either like gorgeous Caucasians with dark tans, or the token fat stereotypes. I’ve known plenty of black women with darker skin that are wonderful attractive people, but I’ve never seen them on TV. I’m an old white guy, too.
I’m just glad that for once, we (blacks) get a break from being the center of ridicule on TV =)
Before anyone suggests that my claim that blacks are ridiculed on TV is false, have you seen the utter bull**** on Maury or have you watched the 6 o’clock news where they manage to find the most ignorant black person to interview for a story? Yeah, that’s what I thought.
On a serious note, I agree that TV/movies do not showcase the true beauty of black women. They are either simply overly tanned white women or the dark, fat mammy stereotypes. I do find it disheartening that media finds the sexual appeal of women of every other race, but finds nothing redeeming about black women.
Just to be clear, I disavow any glorification of the worst aspects of American culture, whether it be white, black, Hispanic, etc. Celebrating trashy behavior is disgraceful.
“I don’t understand the thinking of any man who would assert that black and biracial women need to make themselves look more Caucasian in order to become attractive.” Who says that is any man’s thinking? At least any straight man’s thinking. Who runs the fashion industry by the way?
Didn’t we hash this all out in the 1970s?
“Who says that is any man’s thinking?” See the Chris Rock documentary “Good Hair.” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Good_Hair Women can waste thousands of dollars on their hair only because their men support it. If more men stood up and said they found dead, fake, processed hair unattractive then women would stop torturing themselves to create it.
Hear hear, Kaila. I’m a white woman who had her blonde hair permed into an afro all through high school. I also spent hours by the family pool with my friends of varying hues tanning with the aid of baby oil: I apexed at a medium gold; the Armenian, Italian and Greek were darker, but not by much; and the darkest (and most envied) was the blue-eyed ash blonde, who achieved a gleaming burnt sienna. Women always copy what they like about each other; curly wants to be straight, tall wants to be petite, curvy wants to be boyish, and vice versa. Lots of choices, and hooray for it.
Natural hair must return for all the little black and white and brown girls, some of them not even born yet.
They must not be raised to believe that they must be or look like anything other than how God made them in order to be beautiful.
They must learn from birth that God made us all beautiful-different but beautiful – and without painful changes.
I’m an old white lady and my Mother told me this when I was a pale little towheaded white girl. I still wondered why I needed a Toni.
I guess the message to women has always been “You can be beautiful only if you do (insert painful procedure here.)”
Patty,
Great points on what girls need…
“They must learn from birth that God made us all beautiful-different but beautiful”
Which is why I cant stand the labels Christians get from the Left for not wanting to sexualize their children.
Giving out Condoms in grade schools is simply accepting the media/advertising wordls message…that sex is all about pleasure, everyone should try to “score” the “best” looking gal out there, and only the “hot ones” will have their choice of quality men.
Its a harmful message for girls, and boys too.
People are more than just body parts. Sex is a serious matter. Reducing us to the lowest common denominator is a disservice to humanity.
Our kids deserve better
I enjoy the way black women use their cosmetics and devices like wigs. They come up with some striking looks, and if it’s not natural, it still works. This is a marketing ploy, and we’ll know from the sales whether women will buy it.
I was born with a thick head of curly/frizzy hair. As a child, just getting it brushed was painful! In the ’60′s, when I was in highschool, straight hair was “in”- the Brits made it look mandatory – and I did everything I could to straighten mine. I used Curl Free, made curlers out of large juice cans, and ironed it. I’m white, or should I say “nude”, so I don’t understand why this is presented as a racial thing. It’s not. Throughout history women have been encouraged to go to absurd lengths in order to fit somebody’s idea of “beautiful”.
Why should a woman not change her loocks?. I think California should take the lead and pay for it. Pro chioce!
Certainly no reader knows that in the classicistic phase of German culture in the 18th Century there was such a thing as a “non-naked nude” (although the German language does not allow this expression). Frankly, I prefer women posed as “nude” in the classical sense. A nude bereft of clothes is in her glorious nakedness, well, a let down.
Oh, you youngsters. Back when I was just pubescent, the natural a/k/a the Afro was the height of fashion. Black women vied to grow the biggest, most luxuriant dandelion-head. White women — and black women whose hair was naturally straight — went to great lengths to tease, perm, and product their hair so it too would make the so-desirable Afro.
Then, as now, it was the women reading the glamour and style magazines to figure out how to do it.
Then, as now, men were looking at their boobs.
And I don’t even care what color those boobs are!
I love women, and being with women. I’ve experienced most types except from the Middle East and India. They are each unique and the unique individual is what is so incredible, not what ethnic group she is from. I am white, middle aged but I find generally that non-white attract me more, with a thing for Chinese.
Its fine for women to be into fashion and to look their best. But they should have the confidence that being natural, or within their heratage is OK, but it is also OK to go blonde, straight, curly or whatever. If they want plastic surgery its OK, but who they want as their guy is pretty shallow if some plastic makes a difference to seeing who the woman is.
Yes, nude is probably anglo skin color, but the skin of every healthy woman is a wonderful color.
The placing of the blame for all of this female vanity industry at the feet of men is really just sexism. Men do not care much about this stuff. I remember the lines from a Van Morrison song that I heard many years ago that struck a chord ( pun intended). “All the girls walk by dressed up for each other”. Women do most of this stuff to impress other women. If men find it attractive then that is really just a side issue.
It also brings to mind the old joke. Q: What does a woman have to do to impress a man on their first date. A: Show up.
As an additional comment. I live in Australia and have never actually seen the meaning of “nude” used or listed anywhere before as “the colour of a “white persons flesh”. I have looked in all of the dictionaries I have “The Australian Pocket Oxford Dictionary”, “The Macquarie Dictionary”. A large “Oxford dictionary” plus a couple of free online dictionaries. None of these have any mention of a white person’s flesh.
This also a bit silly because so called “white” people come in quite a few shades. I am celtic in ethni9city with red hair and pink skin. My wife’s ancestors came from Italy so she is a dark olive complection. I believe that maybe their has been a bit of Orwellian revision done on this “Merriam Webster” dictionary. This is a dictionary that I have never heard of actually. Is this an American thing?
Don’t worry about it.
Merriam Webster is to dictionaries as Candy Corn is to gourmet food, or as the Yugo is to fine automobiles.
I forgot to add, when someone quotes Merriam-Webster (except to use it as a bad example, of course), it’s a good sign that you are not dealing with high levels of education or notable intellectual prowess.
Ah, actually the color of a pink person’s _skin_ ; Flesh and blood
are the same color for all colors; A common point to be remembered.
Hasn’t it always been the case that women choose to pursue styles that they prefer? Of course there is always the risk reward trade-off between being “natural” and taking steps to “enhance ” or “make over” oneself and how that plays out in the dating market.
Similarly, I can’t tell you how many men I see obviously use Just for Men or some other color to appear younger (me too!). Why would a man do that? Same reasons as a woman. We prefer how it makes us look and/or because it offers us a benefit that is worth it to us. Do we really think that AA women make these choces so they can land themselves a white guy or please white society?? Give me a break…
What gets me about Rihanna’s critics goes back to this same liberal plantation bull$hit about enforcing some self-appointed arbiter’s idea of what constititutes racial “authenticity”.
Charlie Martin wins!
Charlie usually wins.
We all dress up in various ways.
Taken to its logical extreme, why can’t we feel good in public as naked and unwashed as the day we were born? (Zombie had a stark photo essay of a crowd of people who have gone to this very extreme in San Francisco)
The question I read seems to ask whether this style of makeup/clothing/perfume… compatible with the person’s heritage? That’s a loaded question.
To be sure, there are disingenuous people. They will manifest this conflict in their manners, their clothing, their speech, and so many more things. We can spot them a mile away.
On the other hand, Rihanna, is a self made woman. She’s a widely recognized artist. She, of all people, sets the trends that others follow. Asking questions like this of someone like her is ridiculous to the point of near insult. Who is to judge what is appropriate for her to wear, sell, create, or exhibit? Isn’t the point of being an artist one of exploration? Perhaps the best thing is to ask her what she thinks she’s doing.
Note: I don’t listen to her music, I don’t particularly care for her work, but I do wonder about those who impress their own biases upon an artist’s creation instead of simply asking her.
I’m in favor of people doing whatever the ef they wish to do with their hair regardless of why they want to do it. It’s frigging hair!
I’m bald. I’ll just gracefully bow out of this now…
Kaila,
If you ever find yourself in London then please do shout out. I know all the best places.
What a great girl xx
Fake is ugly.
As far as that goes, millions of white women are undergoing the same sort of thing: Tons of chemicals poured into their hair (perms, for example), and hours wasted at the salon, and even at home. My sister used to spend, literally, TWO HOURS just getting ready for work in the morning, and couldn’t understand how I could be ready to go in just five minutes. The difference? I went natural, and she went “stylish.”
How long before someone starts a campaign to change definition (b), with the same intent as those who want to change the definition of marraige, i.e., it is not inclusive enough?
I never fail to be struck by the impact of race in American politics and society.
I am British (northern English with proper blue-eyed blond hair viking genes FWIW). I would not suggest for a moment that the society I live in is wholly free from racial problems but when I look over the pond I despair.
According to the latest stats about the UK I read about 2/3rds of black males have a non-black partner and about half of black women do as well. We do have very serious issues about crime and educational under-achievement amongst young black men in our deprived inner cities.
But, but…I read somewhere recently, in the context of your general election that fully a fifth of Alabhama voters when polled think that “miscegination” is morally wrong. I don’t want to come over all Yurp lib superior on a forum like this but – seriously guys – it, it being what I see as really strange attitudes towards race, makes me wonder about the right there. I share you fiscal conservatism, I am thoughrally hawkish on foreign policy and am prepared to talk about social values. But the race thing in the US weirds me out big time. I have a grasp of the historical reasons: but this; if I stroll down Brixton or Notting Hill then it ain’t 100 percent black. But Iinglewood is. Big difference between our countries.
And Keila, I am so asking you out.
Tony, I think it’s due largely to the fact that we ended slavery by the illegal application of brutal force, and you ended it by legal means and persuasion.
All we accomplished was to legally free a group of people. Well, that’s good in itself, but it’s not nearly enough. We failed utterly in changing attitudes.
Your way worked much better.
TonyB
I don’t think we’re meant to be since I am in Atlanta and you in London. All joking aside, the racial issues in the US is rather complex. Personally, I believe it stems not from slavery and the Civil War, but from Jim Crow, laws that made blacks second class citizens. These laws were enacted in the South, but the North and the federal governments certainly didn’t step in to protect black citizens until the late 1950′s. Hence, you have both blacks and whites alive who are able to remember this subjugation (my grandparents on both sides were born to sharecroppers), preventing racial flames from dying down.
Another issue is that some whites in areas outside the South believe that its impossible for them to be racist because their state never had slavery or Jim Crow. For example, you mentioned Inglewood, which I am assuming refers to Inglewood, CA. Californians think that since they are uber liberal, it’s impossible for them to be racist, even though their allocation of resources, school districting, etc. screams otherwise. Truth be told, I’ve never had a problem shopping in even the high-end malls of Atlanta, but when I went to a Denver mall, I was followed like a hawk. Why? Since Coloradoans never had the ugly history of the South and believe that they cannot possibly be racist. Conversely, Southerners, due to its ugly racial history, tend to be more conscious of potentially racist behavior and are more proactive about thwarting the unsavory behavior. Refusing to call a spade a spade simply because one has a particular political affiliation or lives in a certain area prevents true racial grievances from being addresses.
Lastly, some black leaders and media outlets earn their money and notoriety by promulgating the belief that America is no different now than it was in 1965. If your income and fame depends upon the existence of racial tensions, you’re not too keen on resolving racial issues.
If you believe there is such a thing as “allocation of resources” you are already too deep in the swamp of racial grievance to have an independent thought.
Noone allocates resources except government, and if governemnt were any other employer, the DOJ would sue them for disparate hiring practices, basically too many blacks. When you have an answer for that besides that you are now entitled to steal form all to redress past grievances against others, which is simple extortion, feel free to express your ideas again.
Until then, your point is stupid, because it doesn’t really exist. It’s a construct, also a lie. It’s funny you can see the trees at the edges of the forest, but are incurious about all them other trees behind them.
And have you noticed all the flash looters who are white?
Can you provide me with links to such an event?
My internet always shows video of these things and somehow, they’ve changed all the white people to blacks.
I suppose that’s a plot, too.
That’s why people look at you funny. Because blacks commit the vast majority of crimes. I know 80% of you are perfectly fine, but you always support those 20% of scumbags. White people don’t support their criminals. They punish them.
Think on it.
=========================================
Great comments here!
I have worked in the arts and entertainment in NYC, and find this issue to be both very revealing of some of the major undercurrents in our socio-political culture, especially now with Identity Politics being the de rigeur of the day.
Fashion, is now one of the main paradigms of the day, even taking on religious overtones, a la Victoria Secret Angels.
Just to keep this light, because I have been backstage at Victoria’s Secret Events, and you know, still recovering.
But seriously, take my wife please, and they did.
Marylin was there, poof, she was gone, then Twiggy appeared and some how this all got blamed on straight white dudes. Yup. All those straight? white guy photogs, and all the mean white board of directors who made Helen Gurley Brown promote sex like it was a new dance move.
This is all part of a new dynamic, part of post-modernism, actually off the fiscal cliff of absurdity, where you set up straw men to slay in between lattes. Third Wave Feiminism.
I am doing an exhaustive study of NPR and have become somewhat of an expert on the inner workings of the Madonna as virgin/whore mythos, and how this is some how Old White Guys fault. Mind you, I am talking about the pop star.It’s all Kabuki theater, where diversity, and fairness are nothing more than a scavenger hunt for lost meaning.
Tommy Hilfiger was the biggest promoter of Hip Hop fashion in the 1990′s, then FUBU came along, promoting a pro-black owned fashion house. The high art of street culture.
I consider fashion to be a post-modern ethos, and one of the biggest straw men out there.
The sophistication of this mechanism makes it almost impossible to deconstruct.
For example, NPR today used a story on the Twinkie, and used a Archie Bunker clip, with Sammie Davis Jr, to seemingly drive home some sort of socio-political point. The same one over and over.
Mick Jagger once opined in his song ‘Some Girls’…”black girls like to get $%#@ all night” and of course also talked about how asian girls were demure, whatever.
East Coast girls are hip, California girls.. Its all good. Fashion, like anything in your life, should be a personal decision, and not so much dictated by a Fashinista Intelligentsia.
I once dated a mulatto, (is that still ok), and she had that curly gold hair that is so in demand today in advertising.
We were both taking a philosophy class, and the teacher wanted us to fill out this questionnaire, sharing things, like what we liked about girls\boys.I remember sitting there, and as she was reading her list of what she liked in men, she said, “nice hair.” I remember thinking, ‘oh man’, as there were a few tough looking black dudes in the class, but no problemo. They never shot me a dirty look.
To paraphrase Rodney King, we all used to get along before the MSM came along man!
California seems to be the petri dish for this type of thing. Every race is beautiful, multiracial people are beautiful. I think we need to focus more on the over-sexualizing of our youth, and not fall for the okey-doke of race/sexual politics. The more radical aspects of the counter-culture movements is trying to hide itself behind a so called Science of beauty.
They got moves like Jagger, but I got moves like Haggard.
Jagger should have kept his tongue firmly planted in his cheek where it belongs.
Honky Please!
At my age, I’m just happy to still have some hair left……
White people aren’t really white; black people aren’t really black; and Orientals aren’t really yellow. Frankly, I think all women should try to look like Veronica Lake, be as smart as Hedy Lamarr, and sing like Peggy Lee – but that’s just me.
I heartily agree with you that “…all women should try to look like Veronica Lake, be as smart as Hedy Lamarr, and sing like Peggy Lee…” You got that right, and if they could be as charming as Irene Dunne and as down-to-earth as Ginger Rogers, with the spirit of Lena Horne, I’d go heterosexual darned quick.
Nude is no more white than black is necessarily african american. How many blacks are black? Very few. Nude is the absence of clothing, period…
More pictures of women in lingerie!!! :: ))
I find white women to be more attractive, generally. Most black, Hispanic, and Asian women I find attractive have white characteristics. Regardless, that doesn’t matter nearly as much as whether or not they are Christian and what their personality is like. Looks aren’t everything, but they are something and I’m sick of being told I can’t have a preference as to what women look like. Again though, I see looks as bonus points or a small percentage of what makes up a woman.
What a strange article for this website…
“I don’t understand the thinking of any man who would assert that black and biracial women need to make themselves look more Caucasian in order to become attractive.”
I totally agree. Why not just date white women instead?!
Oops, I forgot: doing ANYTHING with a white person just isn’t socially acceptable anymore. Talk about a 180-degree social shift…
Sincerely,
A White Woman
I was completely captivated by the lovely young woman in the video gracefully styling her own hair.
Since Kaila brought up the subject of the portrayal of black women on TV, let me see if anyone else shares an observation I’ve made: Whenever a mixed-race couple is shown in a TV ad, whether that couple is portrayed as engaging in a romantic, business or casual encounter, the man is usually black and the woman is usually white. In addition, whenever a black couple is portrayed in similar situations, the man is almost always darker than the woman. Further, you’ll watch TV until your eyes fall out before you’ll see a mixed-race couple where the man is Asian and the woman is black. White or black man coupled with an Asian woman is permissible, it seems.
What’s going on here? My hunch is that, somewhere in the bowels of the advertising world, there is a Diversity Office directing the staffing of commercials. I once read somewhere that white man/black woman combos are discouraged because it evokes the image of the sexual exploitation of black women during the days of slavery. I react poorly to this seeming staffing rule not because black men are displayed in proximity to white women, but because I know that somewhere there’s an arrogant Diversity Officer trying to “raise my consciousness.”
I firmly believe that anyone should be able to do whatever they want with their bodies. However, I worry that weaves and some of the chemicals used seem to cause some African American women have big bald spots. Since the hair won’t grow back, it concerns me in the same way that I think people get too many tattoos too young, and don’t realize the long-term effect.
I get Kaila’s concern – I reject ghetto/white trash culture too, and I understand wanting to differentiate. I just feel that clothes may be a better way to try and make the point, and aren’t going to possibly damage the hair to the point of going bald.
People who think women “should” embrace the natural look have an uphill battle ahead. Women throughout recorded history in almost every culture have been vain about their hair. It’s the one thing that even the poorest woman of the lowest social class knows is her own, which is precisely why shaving a woman’s head has been used as a form of punishment throughout history. Hair is a gift and an asset. We know the attraction our hair holds for men, and unlike many men who grow bald as they age, most of us get to keep it through most of our lives. Even grey hair is beautiful. Most men hate short hair on women, no matter their age or the colour of their hair. Hair is usually the first characteristic men notice in a woman, and their dislike of short hair on women seems pretty much universal. Cutting your hair short like a boy seems counterproductive if you’re a woman hoping to attract a suitable mate or a married woman wanting to keep your husband interested. And the fact that human ingenuity means so many things can be done to change and alter the appearance of hair just means the obsession will continue unto the end of time. Of course women today can choose to opt out of the whole expensive, time-consuming business of hair maintainence, (in fact women in older societies could do this as well; they were called nuns) which can indeed be wonderfully liberating, but most will not.