Write  an argumentative-cause and effect essay. I need 4 full page with professional thesis statement which also answered questions so what, how and why? Make sure there are transmissions sentences between the body paragraphs and contextualization. Use one source that I submitted it, which is your topic to write about. “Note” other sources are not allowed to use. can use TV or Music or movies, commercial to support the essay and site them. Explain how the music and TV, commercial support the claims thoroughly. the conclusion must answered so what question. The article is >> Beauty Standards Reflect Eurocentric Paradigms—So What? Skin Color, Identity, and Black Female Beauty
Cynthia L. Robinson-Moore
University of Nebraska-Omaha
Information about socially appropriate behavior and norms shape identity, and with few exceptions, most people conform in one way or another to some form of acceptable behavior. Without a strong collective identity as a referent, blacks in the U.S. have had a long struggle with Eurocentric beauty standards, since they exclude skin colors and hair types which many black females have. This critical-interpretive analysis of cultural dominance and cultural identity explores how Eurocentric beauty paradigms impact black female identities. Specifically, the research examined ways in which black females’ cultural identities are adapted—then communicated as a result of dominant beauty standards. It was found that European beauty constructs are internalized by blacks in general, and black females in particular. Lighter skinned females with longer hair reported social acceptance and other forms of validation, resulting in higher levels of confidence, self-esteem, and individual successes. Inversely, darker skinned participants, particularly those with shorter hair, experienced feelings of isolation, resulting in lowered self- esteem, some of which limited their social and employment opportunities. To combat dominant beauty standards, participants stressed the need to strengthen cultural identities by using an Afrocentric rather than Eurocentric construct of beauty; the need for positive family messages to counter negative dominant messages; and the need for individual self-acceptance, regardless of skin color, hair, or beauty paradigms.
Being black affects the way a person walks and talks, his or values, culture, and history, how that person relates to others and how they relate to him or her.
The Color Complex (Russell, Wilson, and Hall 1992, 62)
…I begin to suffer from not being [white] to the degree that [whites] impose discrimination on me, makes me a colonized native, robs me of all worth, all individuality, tells me that I am a parasite on the world, that I must bring myself as quickly as possible into step with the white world…Then I will quite simply try to make myself white…
Black Skin, White Masks (Fanon, 1967, 98) I liked being what they liked, so what they liked was who I was.
Jill Scott—poet, songwriter, singer
INTRODUCTION
Recently, CNN’s Soledad O’Brien presented a two-day presentation about the U.S. black experience, (Black in America, July 22-23, 2008), covering such topics as economics, education, male-female relationships, parenting, AIDS, and socio-economic diversity among
blacks. During one interview with professor and author, Dr. Michael Eric Dyson, and his brother, Everett, O’Brien wondered what accounted for socio-economic differences between the two brothers—one a Princeton graduate and the other, a convicted murderer doing life in prison. “Why is one doing life in prison and one a Princeton grad?”, asked O’Brien. Pointing to his brother’s dark skin, and then his own light skin, Dr. Dyson indicated that darker skinned blacks are not afforded the same “opportunities” as lighter skinned blacks. He was referring to the historical relationship of skin color and socio-economic successes among lighter skinned U.S. blacks, and how these advantages had propelled him into Princeton and his darker- skinned brother into crime. O’Brien, however, quickly minimized Dyer’s interpretation of the relationship between skin color and socio-economic differences. Like many other discussions
Beauty Standards Reflect Eurocentric Paradigms 67
about race and U.S. blacks, O’Brien’s Black in America ignored critical issues of skin color and hair variations on individual black experiences.
“Are light skinned black people favored over dark skinned black people?” asked model, Tyra Banks (The Tyra Banks Show, April 24, 2008). To make her question more salient, Banks discussed a black nightclub owner who recently advertised, but later cancelled, a night allowing light skinned women free entrance—dark skinned women would have to pay. One woman with dark skin said she was not surprised—she has experienced discrimination all of her life from black people, simply because she has dark skin. She told Banks’ guests about attending a slumber party as a child and being told by the other girls that she was “too dark” to play with. The girls then locked her in a basement room for several hours, where she “cried all night” until being let out. More recently, this same woman was told by a black man, “You’re just so black, so dark.” The implication was clear: she was too dark.
“The root of African American difficulty is directly related to skin color,” stated writer James Baldwin (qtd in Hall, 2000, 173). This “root” is exposed through Eurocentric beauty standards. In an article in Ebony magazine (April, 2000), Joy Bennett Kinnon called the relationship between blacks, skin color, and beauty “a hidden and dangerous issue…the family secret that won’t go away…the inner language of skin color, shade, and variation” (Kinnon, Ebony, 2000). Blacks, both males and females, see Europeanized skin tones and hair textures/ lengths as a standard measure of beauty, resulting in a light skin, long hair bias inherent in black U.S. culture (Morton, 1985; Taylor, 1999).
This research examines the impact of Eurocentric beauty paradigms on black female identity. What are individual experiences of black females as they negotiate dominant beauty standards? Specifically, using Eurocentric skin color and hair valuations, what is the experience of being “attractive” or “unattractive” for black females, and how have these experiences impacted identity? Through a critical lens, I examine the impact of cultural dominance on cultural identities of black females by exploring the relationship between Eurocentric beauty paradigms and black female beauty experiences.
Why is the relationship between race, black female beauty, and identity important scholarship? Critical researchers explore hidden power relationships that influence behavior upon non-dominant groups, requiring researchers to get at the meaning behind the meaning (Thomas, 1993). Information about socially appropriate behaviors and norms shape identity, and with few exceptions, most people conform in one way or another to some form of acceptable behavior (Smith, 2001; Taylor, 2002). Thus, an important question is not whether one conforms, but to whose cultural construct does one conform? Adherence to beauty standards, one way in which people comply or conform to culturally dominant norms, forces women to accept themselves with limits and affects their self-esteem (Callaghan, 1994).
As much as race and sex, beauty acts as a cultural status, activating patterns of shared belief (Webster and Driskell, 1983). Beauty is socially constructed, yet standards appear normal when, in fact, they are used as a means of social control. Acting as a “currency system like the gold standard” (Wolf, 1991, 12), the results of beauty as status are the same as rich over poor, male over female, white over black (Umberson and Hughes, 1987; Webster and Driskell, 1983). Cultural validations of being attractive, hegemonically formed and reinforced, are accepted by blacks and whites alike as normal (Russell, Wilson, and Hall, 1992). Yet, while any beauty standard will oppress someone (Leeds, 1994), in the U.S., beauty is racially defined (Russell, Wilson, and Hall 1992; Taylor 1999), making Eurocentric beauty paradigms more salient for black females than for black males.
Both raced and gendered, black females are presented with white male beauty perceptions (light skin, long hair) which, as a double whammy, also impact and influence black males, a major determinant of black female beauty perceptions and sense of overall attractiveness (Bissell,
68 Cynthia L. Robinson-Moore
2002; Black and Sharma, 2001). Thus, racially defined beauty standards are particularly oppressive for black females since they exclude skin color and hair types which many black females have (Gaskins 1997; St. Jean and Feagin, 1998; Taylor, 1999; Wolf, 1991).
Racial beauty hierarchies, communicated through skin color and hair, affects the lives of black women on three major levels. First, skin color and hair textures, prominent signs of African ancestry, affect attractiveness and, therefore, socialization. Umberson and Hughes (1987) found that attractive people are given preferential treatment from childhood through adulthood, and this makes them more likely to succeed. Holcomb-McCoy and Moore- Thomas’ (2001) study of black adolescent females found those with physical attributes most unlike those of whites—especially hair and skin color—were often alienated from others at schools and other social places, resulting in lowered achievement levels and higher high school drop out rates for darker-skinned black females.
Differences in income are a second way in which Eurocentric beauty standards communicate skin color value. Black women who, based on skin color and hair texture criteria, do not meet established beauty standards, are more likely to be unemployed. Aschenbrenner’s (1975) study of black families in Chicago found that women who were poor were more likely to be dark. Umberson and Hughes found that attractiveness issues “interact with employment status” (Umberson and Hughes, 1987, 232-233) because attractive people are more likely to be hired and given other opportunities, such as employment and education. Not surprisingly, darker- skinned black women, more likely to be under-educated and under-employed, are also more likely to be poor than lighter skinned black women.
The third and, perhaps, most devastating way in which racialized beauty hierarchies affect black women is spousal status. Hughes and Hertel (1990) found that racial hierarchies impact black mate selection so that light skinned black women are higher in status than those with dark skin. Simply put, racial hierarchies influence black men to prefer light skinned women. In addition to wanting light skinned children (Brown and English 1969), there are economic and social advantages to having a light skinned wife, most notably social acceptance (Frazier, 1957; McAdoo, 1997; Reuter, 1917). As a result, dark skinned black women are the least likely to be married.
Despite the evidence that Eurocentric beauty hierarchies affect socialization, socio- economic status, and mate selection of black females, empirical research that deals with the actual experience of skin color and hair on black female identity is lacking. Intersections of race, gender, and identity are rarely explored. What is the impact on identity for black females who fit Eurocentric constructs? What about black females who lack Eurocentric beauty criteria?
This research seeks to understand the experiences of individual black females as they negotiate dominant beauty constructs. The first half of the paper begins with a brief overview of cultural identity and cultural dominance as they relate to this research. Next, I discuss how the social construction of race—and subsequent Eurocentric beauty paradigms—has created negative valuations of darker skin and shorter hair among U.S. blacks. The second half of the paper details a qualitative research path and results examining the impact of Eurocentric beauty paradigms on black female identity.
IDENTITY, RACE, AND U.S. BLACKS
“The most fundamental state of disorder” among blacks, argues Azibo, is operating without an “African-centered belief system” (Azibo, 1988, 183-184). For U.S. blacks, descendants of African slaves, knowledge about Africa and African culture is limited, weakening an African cultural identity. For more than two centuries, African slaves in the U.S. were effectively forbidden to culturally be African, stripped of name, language and religion (Davis, 1981;
Beauty Standards Reflect Eurocentric Paradigms 69
Dines, 1994; Gates, 1997), while also prevented from knowing African history (Browne and English, 1969; Bhugra, 2001; Golden, 1983). Thus, blacks in the U.S., although descendents of Africans, lack a strong collective identity as Africans. This fact was underscored by young, black females in Kiri Davis’ (2005) documentary, A Girl Like Me. “Like for me,” commented one teenager, “it’s like I don’t have any actual culture. I know I’m from Africa, but…” Another female stated, “You’re ripped out of your culture. You’re missing a piece of you because of the lack of knowledge about Africa, and the connection between African Americans.” Because the historical base is absent, self-knowledge is absent, and cultural identity is impacted.
An important socio-environmental process, identity is tied to communication and culture—that is, one’s identity is communicated by way of cultural verbal and nonverbal expressions (Hecht, Jackson, and Ribeau, 2003; Mathews, 2000). Representation of dominant cultural norms and values as standard by non-dominant cultural groups is a communicative reflection of ways in which cultural identities are impacted. Culture, briefly defined here as shared beliefs and values which influence behavior in communities (Calloway-Thomas, Cooper, and Blake, 1999), is patterned behavior. Cultural identity is communicated through a two way mirror—looking at oneself through the eyes of others (Jackson and Stewart, 2002). “There is no doubt,” Sarup (1996) states, “that identity-construction is increasingly dependent on images.” Without a strong group identity, non-dominant cultural groups will imitate the group(s) they perceive as having the highest social status (Fanon, 1967; Fitchett, 1940; Hecht, et. al., 2003; Vandiver, 2001). Denied the use of native languages, religions, and other cultural traditions essential to maintaining a collective African identity, blacks in the U.S. are culturally more European than African (Arogundade, 2000; Cox, 1948; de Reuck and Knight, 1967; Frazier, 1957; Russell, Wilson, and Hall, 1992). Thus, a representation that reflects dominant cultural standards and behaviors is a response of marginalized groups’ reactions to cultural norms as standard (Vandiver, 2001).
Cultural dominance or hegemony is the influence of the dominant culture’s social behaviors, beliefs, values and patterns on non-dominant or marginalized groups (Griffin, 2003). Smith defines cultural hegemony as “the ability of the state and the ruling class to regulate beliefs within civil society,” which “reinforce inequality,” limits “attempts at critical thinking,” and allows dominant groups “to rule more efficiently” (Smith, 2001, 39). Importantly, argues Mumby, “realities are neither imposed coercively on people, nor emerge spontaneously and consensually” (Mumby, 1997, 344). Indeed, marginalized groups may actively participate and support systems of power that support the status quo, but that work against self-group interest (Fanon, 1967).
Understanding ways in which construction of cultural dominant images influence non- dominant groups is central to understanding cultural identity formation (Carbaugh, 1996). In U.S. society, one way in which cultural dominance is constructed is through the concept of “race” (Cox, 1948; Zack, 1995).
Race: A Dominant Cultural Paradigm
Put simply, race is a hierarchical, colorized system of domination of whites over non-whites (Welsing, 1991). By placing people in racial categories, the U.S. racial system—“hierarchically organized and hegemonically dominated…more by consent than through coercion” (Ebert, 2004, 182)—covertly reinforces white dominance as a cultural construct, often with the participation of non-dominant groups.
As a dominant cultural paradigm, race can be conceptualized as the social construction of white-ness as normal and standard, while non-whites are categorized as other (Gates, 1997). Because white is the norm, there is no need for whites to racially identify with whites. As Dyer notes, although “black” is colorized, “white is no color because it is all colors.” Indeed,
70 Cynthia L. Robinson-Moore
“This property of whiteness, to be everything and nothing, is the source of its representational power…white domination is reproduced by the way that white people ‘colonize the definition of normal’” (Dyer, 1997, 7).
Yet, race is an illusion—it is real but not real (Cox ,1948; Drake and Cayton, 1945; Herring, Keith, and Horton, 2004). Race is not real but a socially constructed ideology (Blauner, 1972; Garrett, 1999; Omi and Winant, 1986; Zack, 1995), which has no biological or scientific proof or foundation (Herring, et. al, 2004; Zack, 1995). In fact, race distinction was not known in the modern world until introduced by Europeans sometime after the 16th century (Blauner, 1972; Cox, 1948; de Reuck, and Knight, 1966; Welsing, 1991). As Omi and Winant note, theories of humans being divided into racially distinct categories arose out of European explorations, capitalism and colonialism, when natives of Africa, Asia, and the Americas were encountered and categorized as other:
At stake were not only the prospects for conversion [to Christianity], but the types of treatment to be accorded them. The expropriation of property, the denial of political rights, the introduction of slavery and other forms of coercive labor, as well as outright extermination, all presupposed a worldview which distinguished Europeans—children of God, human beings, etc.—from “others.” Such a worldview was needed to explain why some should be “free” and others enslaved, why some had rights to land and property while others did not. Race, and the interpretation of racial differences, was a central factor in that worldview. (Omi and Winant, 1986, 58)
Although race is socially constructed based on physical characteristics, most notably skin color and hair type, but also eye color and the size of noses and lips (Herring, Keith, and Horton, 2004; Taylor, 1999; Welsing, 1991; Zack, 1995), racial identification is actually based on what is known about a particular group’s ancestors’ physical characteristics (Drake and Cayton, 1945; Herring, et. al., 2004; Taylor, 1999). Physical traits are arbitrarily turned into racial traits, and people are ascribed racial categories, which are perpetuated generationally (Cox, 1948; Ebert, 2004; Gates, 1997; Omi and Winant, 1986). Thus, race appears real— hence the illusion.
As a social construct, the importance of race is often downplayed by the dominant cultural group. Observes Ebert, “White America displays a studied ignorance of the history of racial oppression and the established social order” (Ebert, 2004, 175). This diminishment of race privileges whites while de-privileging blacks. Importantly, it is not racial categories which are disputed by whites but racial hierarchies—even with obvious racial inequalities within the U.S. social system, whites deny they are a privileged group. Instead, the U.S. mainstream claims American society is a color-blind meritocracy, which further reinforces and strengthens the racial system by constructing “whiteness” as normal or standard. Ebert argues:
The racial logic of a color-blind society especially helps the dominant group, in this case, white America, to support an ideology that appears race-neutral but maintains the current racial order and allows whites to benefit from their own skin color…Racial inequalities currently persist through subtle means. They are re-created through the support of not only the dominant group, but through the consent of large numbers of the subordinate group. In other words, the dominant group actively supports strategies to maintain…their privilege, and a large portion of the subordinate group supports the dominant ideology as well, suggesting its hegemonic nature. (Ebert, 2004, 178, 180)
Socially constructed racial hierarchies are simultaneously made salient among non-whites, while deemed non-existent by white America. Race as a colorized system is not unique to the U.S. but can be traced to wherever European colonialism has existed (Blauner, 1972; Cox ,1948; de Reuck and Knight, 1966; Herring, Keith, and Horton, 2004; Taylor, 1999; Zack,
Beauty Standards Reflect Eurocentric Paradigms 71
1995), making the relationship between skin color and social status global (Garrett, 1999; Hall, 2003; Welsing, 1991). So connected is the concept of race to whiteness, there are only twosystemsofracialhierarchies:whitesoverblacksandlightsoverdark(Cox,1948). Globally, lighter-skinned nations are regarded as powerful and dominate darker-skinned nations in negotiation of global issues. Even within nations, lighter-skinned groups and individuals are perceived as smarter and more competent (de Reuck and Knight, 1967; Garrett, 1999).
On every continent where there has existed a white ruling class, post-colonial skin color issues continue to be felt. Skin color is either valued or devalued, making a “colorblind” world impossible. Hall claims that even where colonial powers have been replaced by native rule, light skin domination continues to exist there, with those “uppermost in status” being individuals and groups “whose heritage most approximates that of the light skinned colonists and the least being the opposite extreme” (Hall, 2000, 172). Hall’s study of Puerto Ricans found that, although the island country boasts of a diverse population and variations of skin colors, lighter-skinned Puerto Ricans are considered superior to those with darker skin tones. This illustrates how skin color is social capital with lighter skin having more value than dark skin at both the group and individual level (Garrett, 1999; Hall, 2003; Russell, Wilson, and Hall, 1992).
In U.S. society, notes Blauner, the socially constructed concept of race has been institutionalized so that the “processes that maintain domination—control of whites over non- whites—are built into the major social institutions” (Blauner, 1972, 9-10). He cautions that race should not be confused with prejudice and discrimination, although these are byproducts of the system of racial domination. Further, race is institutionalized in U.S. society and not dependent on individual prejudice and discrimination. Blacks are inherently inferior, as their dark skin shows, in the family of races. Skin color, then, not only functions as a physical characteristic, but also serves as a placement along the human civilization continuum, placing those with lighter skin far ahead of those with dark skin. Consequently, because dark is ugly and bad, while light is beautiful and good, lighter-skinned blacks are seen as intelligent, clean and nice, while “dumb and dirty” (Brown, 1998, 96) are stereotypically reserved for darker- skinned people. Not surprisingly, one study (Hughes and Hertel, 1990) found that differences in the socio-economic status between light and dark skinned U.S. blacks mirror differences in the socio-economic status between whites and blacks.
Race, Skin Color and U.S. Blacks
Historically, black Africans are at the bottom of racial hierarchies (Augstein, 1996). Conveniently, the trans-Atlantic slave trade, which found itself concerned with the enslavement of only Africans, was justified on the basis of race. While slavery was not new to the world, the enslavement of people based solely on skin color was (Cox, 1948; de Reuck and Knight, 1966; Frazier, 1968). The U.S. involvement in the African slave trade is important to the evolution of race in U.S. society because, as noted earlier, one’s racial group is relative to one’s ancestral group. This means that, although not a biological category, racial socialization and identity is real (Blauner, 1972; Ebert, 2004; Zack, 1995).
For U.S. blacks, color stratification evolved out of the institution of slavery in which Africans, having dark skin and deemed inferior, were enslaved and exploited. Along with slavery came the practice of sexual relations—both forcibly and voluntarily—between whites and blacks, and African women were used sexually for breeding (Cox, 1948; Golden, 1983; Herring, 2004; McAdoo, 1997; Morton, 1985; Zack, 1995). Russell, Wilson and Hall explain, “Against a backdrop of love and rape, politics and war, and, ultimately, power and privilege, attitudes about skin color evolved in America” (Russell, Wilson and Hall, 1992, 10). Eventually, “genes and chromosomes from Africa, Europe, and a pristine America” created
72 Cynthia L. Robinson-Moore
what Haizlip calls, both “the American ideal” and “the American nightmare” (Haizlip, 1994, 15). Blacks in the U.S. are every hue and shade—from the “ideal” light to the “nightmare” dark. Hall states, “In a nation where ‘whiteness’ is ideal, light skin invariably represents the standard” (Hall, 2000, 179). These standards are important to understanding the relationship between race, skin color, and black female beauty.
Lighter skin, already given a higher social status, evolved into a socio-economic resource (McAdoo, 1997). Historical advantages given to house slaves, many of whom were light skinned, meant that entire families received a head start over families with darker skin, both educationally and economically (Graham, 1999). After the Civil War, it was these historical social differences between dark and light skinned blacks that were responsible for economic successes among blacks, particularly males (Hill, 2000). The children and grandchildren of those house slaves—early black aristocrats—went on to become the leading educators and religious leaders of black America (McAdoo, 1997). DuBois’ declaration that the “Talented Tenth” represented the “best and most capable” of blacks is notable because DuBois was, himself, a descendent of this privileged mulatto group, as were most of the blacks who comprised these “favored sons” (DuBois, 1903, 46). Although most blacks in the U.S. were of mixed African, Native, and European ancestry, the majority of successful blacks were light skinned (Drake and Cayton, 1945; Frazier, 1957; Morton, 1985).
By the turn of the 20th century, it was official: light skin color signified superior status, especially if one’s family members were free before the Civil War. Until the early part of the 20th century, when WWI meant an increased economic and social mobility for the masses of blacks, lighter-skinned blacks were the preferred physical group in the black community (Drake and Cayton, 1945). Washington, D.C. was the center of black society, with a large professional black class working for the federal government (Frazier, 1957). The mulatto elite were privileged even during the strict Jim Crow era, escaping much of the violence and lynchings that darker-skinned blacks experienced (Haizlip, 1994).
Both black and white churches have played a historical role in de-valuing dark skin. Being naturally conservative, the church has a history of sanctioning the interests of the ruling class and has assisted in maintaining the status quo. For example, following established race relations, Christianity and the Bible were both used to prove dark skin inferiority, beginning with painting the devil black, while “white” was reserved for angels, Jesus and ultimately, God (Cox, 1948; Frazier, 1957). Among the light skinned elite’s so-called “blue vein societies” were black churches that did not extend memberships to blacks whose “blue veins” were not visible beneath their skin. This social practice both excluded darker-skinned blacks and increased light skinned superiority paradigms (Cox, 1948).
Skin Color and Black Female Beauty
Although virtually invisible in academic scholarship and research (Russell, Wilson, and Hall, 1992), the “color issue” has long been a topic discussed by blacks in general, and black women in particular. In an early essay on blacks and skin color, Gibson (1931) observed, “The burden of blackness weighs more heavily on the woman than on the man…” (415). More than seventy-five years ago, Steward’s, The Black Girl Passes, boldly proclaimed that dark skinned females are “relegated to the rear economically” and “shunned socially” (Steward, 1928, 103), by both black males and females, affecting both socio-economic status and mate selection. Thurman’s (1929) novel, The Blacker the Berry, examined directly the issue of skin color on the identity of his main character, Emma Lou, whose dark skin was so offensive that it virtually hid her beauty. Although not authored or directed by blacks, The Imitation of Life (1934, 1959), a motion picture which partly examined the issue of blacks “passing” for white, depicts both the stereotypical dark skinned “mammy” character and the “tragic
Beauty Standards Reflect Eurocentric Paradigms 73
mulatta,” Hollywood’s early image of black female beauty (Russell, Wilson, and Hall, 1992). Toni Morrison’s (1970) The Bluest Eye is a classic illustration of hegemonic cultural validations of attractiveness for black females. Through Pecola Breedlove, an adolescent female, Morrison reveals the relationship between race, beauty, and socio-economic status. Dark skinned and ugly, the Breedloves are also very poor. Spike Lee’s movie, School Daze (1988), also tackled intra-cultural tensions between dark and light skinned black college students.
More recently, Kiri Davis’ (2005) short documentary, A Girl Like Me, illustrated the complexity of identity issues that continue to plague black females. “At a young age,” states Davis, “I already knew the standards for a girl like me. As I become older, they become more obvious.” These “standards” include Eurocentric prerequisites for black female beauty. Davis, a high school student and aspiring filmmaker, interviewed several black females examining issues involving race, beauty standards, and self-image. “People love themselves, except for their color,” stated one girl. “There are standards that are imposed upon us,” said another, “like, you’re prettier if you’re light.” Black female hair must also reflect Eurocentric beauty paradigms. “You have to have straight or permed hair…or like blonde hair or weaves or something…” said one teenager. The only natural hair acceptable is hair worn by “the curly headed mixed girl.” One girl who wore her hair natural was told by her mother, “Stop that! You’re starting to look African.” The girl replied, “But I am African.” Davis’ (2005) documentary reflects how Eurocentric beauty standards are imposed on black females, who must struggle to resist internalizing negative valuations of skin color and hair textures that reflect an African heritage.
Black Cultural Identity
Black cultural identity in U.S. society must be viewed within the paradigm of racial hierarchies (Cox, 1948; Fanon, 1967; Gates, 1997; Hecht, Jackson, and Ribeau 2003; Herring, et. al., 2004; Hill-Collins, 2000). Mentacide, the genocidal destruction of a group’s cultural identities, is the silent rape of collective identity (Azibo, 1988). I have explained that cultural groups without a strong collective identity will often imitate the highest status group(s), especially if power issues have been magnified by slavery and colonialism (Taylor, 2002; Zack, 1995). The subordinate group adopts cultural values that are consistent with the dominant culture but inconsistent with their own self identity and self worth. Since Eurocentric racial hierarchies promote white or light superiority, U.S. blacks, lacking a collective African identity, also promote white or light superiority.
Influenced by cultural dominance and lacking a strong African identity, many black women suffer from mammyism, defined as genetic blackness minus psychological blackness (Abdullah, 1998; Azibo, 1988). Mammyism occurs when black females, embracing a Eurocentric perspective of beauty, reject their African physical features, especially skin color and hair. Black females adapt Euro-American cultural norms (Azibo, 1988; Browne and English, 1969; Finney, 1997; Golden, 1983), linking dark skin to negative physical beauty—reinforcing negative viewsofdarkskin(Vandiver,2001). Centraltothisresearch,racialhierarchieshasalsocreated colorism, discrimination towards individuals within the same racial group based on shades of light, brown or dark skin color (Herring 2004). These acts of prejudice can occur inter-racially, which is the foundation for socio-economic privileges among light skinned blacks, and they can occur intra-racially, within the black community itself. Consequential negative socialization of African inferiority among blacks native to the U.S. produces internalized discrimination towards one’s own group and toward self (de Reuck and Knight, 1967; Herring, 2004).
Clark and Clark published one of the earliest studies of effects of skin color on black children. The “Doll Test” illustrated that black children were negatively impacted by racial hierarchies. The researchers conducted an experiment with 253 black children between the
74 Cynthia L. Robinson-Moore
ages of three and seven at nursery and public schools in Arkansas and Massachusetts. The children were shown two dolls—identical in every way except skin color. According to the researchers, “Approximately two-thirds of the subjects indicated by their responses…that they like the white doll ‘best’…and that the white doll is a ‘nice’ doll.” Further, “There is a tendency for the majority of these children, in spite of their own skin color, to prefer the white doll and to negate the brown doll” (Clark and Clark, 1947, 174-177). More recently, Davis (2005) duplicated this study, asking twenty-one pre-school aged children to choose which doll was the nicest, prettiest, and so on. Fifteen of the twenty-one children chose the white doll, specifically, some said, because it was white. When asked what color they were, the children were able to identify themselves with the brown doll.
After a discussion detailing a qualitative research path, the remainder of this paper examines specifically the impact of Eurocentric beauty hierarchies on individual black, female identities, using skin color and hair as beauty criteria.
METHODOLOGY
Critical scholars use empirical research to explore hidden power relationships that influence behavior of non-dominant groups (Thomas, 1993). In traditional research, women’s lives have been made invisible (and black women in particular), unless the study concerns them necessarily (Giddings, 1984; Reinharz, 1992). Critical-interpretive research is a way to make women’s lives visible and their voices heard, allowing an understanding of women from their own perspectives. With the goal of producing change at the personal, social, or political level, critical-interpretive research methods are where the questions answered are not just “what” and “why” but also “what can be done about it?” The interpretive approach is concerned with understanding while the critical approach is concerned with producing change. Culture is studied as a way of changing or challenging social power structures, and researchers speak on behalf of the participants (Thomas, 1993). As a researcher, I seek not only an understanding of black females’ beauty perceptions, but also an eradication of cultural dominant influences, because they are based on racial hierarchies which de-privilege black women. This research was concerned specifically with the impact of Eurocentric beauty paradigms on individual black female identities, based on skin color and hair variations.
Using qualitative research methods, narratives were collected from thirty-eight black women between the ages of nineteen and eighty-one. A qualitative interview is “an interaction between an interviewer and a participant in which the interviewer has a general plan of inquiry, but not a specific set of questions that must be asked using particular words and in a particular order” (Baxter and Babbie, 2004, 325). Lofland and Lofland’s advice to “collect the richest possible data; achieve intimate familiarity with the setting; and engage in face-to-face interviews so as to participate in the minds of the settings’ participants” (Lofland and Lofland, 1995, 17) is an integral part of this research.
This study was concerned with the conversational aspects of qualitative interviewing. I employed a set of semi-structured interview questions that allowed for thick, rich, narrative descriptions (Fontana and Frey, 1994), enhancing my “attempts to describe, explain and understand the lived experiences” (Charmaz, 1995, 30) of black women. To understand the impact of racialized beauty hierarchies on individual, black female identities, this research chose a qualitative research path. The next section details this path, discussing participants, data collection and analysis.
Beauty Standards Reflect Eurocentric Paradigms 75
Participants
As Mama observed, when trying to get at the effects of the unconscious on the conscious, as is the case of studying race and gender issues, “a different means of collecting, analyzing, and thinking about one’s subject matter is required.” She further states, “While I was considering how best to go about gathering material…I realized that I was surrounded by exactly the kind of material I needed and participated in producing each time I…spent time with other Black women” (Mama, 1995, 72).
Because I am a long time resident of the local black community, I had little trouble recruiting participants.1 Primarily, participants were recruited via word-of-mouth. I began with women familiar to me, but gravitated as well toward women whose particular skin color, hairstyle, or a combination of both, interested me. Some of these women I knew very well, some I knew fairly well, and some were total strangers.
After meeting the necessary criteria of being black,2 female, and at least nineteen years old, participants were chosen for their general skin color/tone (dark, medium, light), hair texture/ length (short, long, wavy, kinky) or a combination of both. Importantly, the goal was never for statistical balance, but rather to ensure as much variation among skin colors and hair as possible. Participants also varied widely in age, education, occupation, and economic status.
Semi-structured Interviews
Interview questions were designed to gain an understanding of the impact of Eurocentric beauty hierarchies on individual beauty perceptions, and to understand the acceptance or resistance process that black females engage as they accept or reject constructs. I was particularly interested in messages that communicate skin color and hair variations to black females. Participants were asked to “think about the first time” they learned skin color and hair had value. They were also asked to consider the importance of skin color and hair texture when determining beauty. Issues of “good/bad hair” were explored, and participants were asked to recall their first experiences with “hair straightening.” To evaluate individual participants’ self- concept of beauty and overall levels of attractiveness as a child, adolescent, or adult, I asked, “Did you think you were cute growing up?” and probed “why or why not?” One question examined the saliency of family versus societal messages. In total, there were ten interview questions.
Individual interviews lasted approximately ninety minutes and group interviews between 11⁄2 – 3 hours, with the average time of two hours. In all, thirty-eight women participated in a total of twenty group and individual interviews.3 Because of the nature of this research, both group and individual in-depth interviews were necessary for this study. Group interviews provide rich data “over and above individual responses” (Fontana and Frey 1994, 365), while individual interviews afforded those participants who were not comfortable talking about sensitive issues of skin color and hair in groups an opportunity to do so more privately. For example, the two oldest participants were both insistent about being interviewed individually, specifically because individual interviews afforded more confidentiality. Several participants specifically requested either individual or group interviews, but I discreetly asked each participant which interviewing format they would prefer.
All interviews were both audio- and video-taped, and then transcribed. Interview transcripts averaged 25 pages for individual interviews and 44 pages for group interviews. Total transcribed pages number close to 700. I was the sole data collector and transcriber. For the written report, participants are represented by pseudonym initials.
76 Cynthia L. Robinson-Moore
Data Analysis
Qualitative data analysis is a useful tool for understanding the relationship between cultural dominance and cultural identity. “The analysis of qualitative data occurs while data are being gathered” (Baxter and Babbie, 2004, 297). Transcribing recorded interviews afforded me several opportunities to experience the interviews and hear things I might otherwise have missed, enhancing data analysis. All interviews were transcribed verbatim for “uttered talk,” including all verbal expressions, which provides rich, narrative detail (Baxter and Babbie, 2004, 352). Viewing the videotapes along with the transcripts gave yet another opportunity to experience interviews, strengthening data analysis. Videotapes were also used to ensure data accuracy, and to aid in annotating and coding transcripts.
Transcripts are primary sources that speak and, therefore, can be used as text (Baxter and Babbie, 2004; Bernard, 2002; Reinharz, 1992). These transcribed “conversations with a purpose” create text out of raw material by which “the researcher becomes intimately familiar with the data, hearing things that might otherwise be missed” (Baxter and Babbie, 2004, 351). Useful for categorizing or coding raw interview data, textual or content analysis involves an examination of written texts (Berg, 1998; Reinharz, 1992). Textual analysis “provides a method for obtaining good access to the words of text,” and “understanding better the perspective(s) of the producer of these words” (Berg, 1998, 225). As they informed the research, textual data were coded into categories, read for meaning, re-coded, and exemplars given in narrative form.
The coding process involved general patterns relative to dominant beauty messages: the impact of dominant beauty messages on black female identities, and how these messages were accepted or resisted. Textual data were grouped together according to emerging patterns about messages, identity, and influences. I was especially concerned with the experience of individual females relative to their specific skin color or hair type. Essentially, data answered the question, “What does it mean to look like you?” Initial categories were then divided into smaller categories. For example, understanding the impact on cultural identities included a discussion about self-esteem. When “the marginal value of the new data [was] minimal” (Pandit 1996, 10), saturation had been reached. When I kept hearing the same dominant messages, kept seeing the same patterns of identity impact, and kept hearing the same testimonies of acceptance or resistance, the data analysis process was complete.
After the study, member checks were conducted, returning to respondents to make sure coding categories were credible. Primarily, this was accomplished by asking several participants to give their perspectives of these categories. Participants were also provided with a copy of the final report.
The remainder of this paper discusses the impact of Eurocentric beauty standards on individual, black female identities, specifically using skin color and hair texture/length as beauty criteria.
BEAUTY STANDARDS REFLECT EUROCENTRIC PARADIGMS—SO WHAT?
Much has been said about the relationship between cultural dominance and cultural identity, particularly as it relates to Eurocentric beauty standards and U.S. blacks. Eurocentric beauty paradigms communicate that lighter skin tones and longer, straighter hair is the standard for female beauty, perpetuating a valuation of both skin color and hair texture among U.S. blacks. There are important gender differences, however, which make skin color issues more salient for black females than males. Racial hierarchies, while color dominated, are also male dominated, making the experiences of having dark, brown or light skin different for black women than black men. Participants discussed the impact on identity of fitting—or not fitting—into Eurocentric beauty constructs.
Beauty Standards Reflect Eurocentric Paradigms 77
Beauty Constructs, Black Females, and Self-Esteem
What is the impact on identity to have skin color and hair that fit dominant beauty constructs? Affecting mate selection, and ultimately, socio-economic status, attractiveness is an important determinant of being socially accepted, and social acceptance affects self-esteem (Umberson and Hughes, 1987). Webster and Driskell write, “Attractive people are seen as better at most things and are more successful; and better and successful people become, by virtue of those traits, more attractive to others” (Webster and Driskell, 1983, 143). Several “attractive” participants, all with light skin and long hair, discussed how early validations of social acceptance increased their confidence and self-esteem:
Confidence. You know, um, I did real good in school. You know, I, I looked forward to getting up in the morning and getting dressed. I couldn’t wait to wake up in the morning and get dressed! “What am I going to wear today? And how am I going to do my hair today?” You know…? So, that’s what I looked forward to, and I just think it just made my whole day good…I was about 10 [years old]. (NX)
Another participant agreed
And it did give me confidence…I was never conceited about it. Never conceited…But yeah, as a child, I always felt pretty. You know, because I was told and just like other comments, when we’re told, it stays with us. (EP)
In fact, lighter skinned females, more socially accepted by both blacks and whites, were also more likely to be socially successful. One woman, a small business owner, discussed the connection between her physical appearance and her accomplishments:
I think it’s the way you were raised. I think it’s what you perceive as a child. …It’s not something you say, “Oh, I’m light, I’m better.” You really don’t feel that way…But you do know it. You do know it…Whatever we tried to achieve, we achieved okay? Whatever we wanted to do. So you can’t say we weren’t superior…But, I think it’s just because of things that you saw. You know, you act upon what you see…We’re more positive and we know that in the end, we’re going to win. But where do we get that from?…So, if you’re raised that way, and you see that people treat you like that, you’re going to act that way. (SX)
Several light skinned participants reported being cheerleaders in high school and doing modeling as adults. One woman described her lightest female sibling, who has been both a flight attendant and television anchor, as having an “outgoing personality” and being “well accepted socially.” States the participant, “Her looks have gotten her very far.”
What about black females located outside of beauty paradigms? While attractive people are more likely to be socially accepted, inversely, not only are “ugly” people discriminated against, beauty standards are so internalized that society is often unaware of perpetuating this discrimination (Webster and Driskell, 1983). According to Eurocentric beauty constructs, “ugliness” is intensified by dark skin.
Two participants in their early 20s remembered attending a local community center as children. They discussed the differences in how young, black girls were treated by adult, black women, based on skin color and hair criteria. Stated one young woman, “It was really about being more attractive. When you were more attractive, the staff wanted to do more with you.” The other participant agreed, but was more specific. “When you’re younger…dark skinned girls, I mean, it was okay,” she stated, “but the pretty light skinned girl with the long hair down her back, you know, get extra cookies.”
78 Cynthia L. Robinson-Moore
Surprisingly, dark as ugly was communicated by several dark skinned participants. An older dark skinned woman describes an “ugly” woman:
Now she was the homeliest woman that I have ever seen. And I’ll say she was the ugliest woman I ever, ever seen in life. But she had such a beautiful personality, you don’t even look at [her] and see how ugly she really is…Oh, she’s very dark! And excuse me, but she is black! I mean, she’s black! And ugly…She is 11:59 [p.m.], so you know she’s dark! (MU)
“You know like, because I ain’t going to lie,” stated another young, dark skinned participant, “it’s more ugly dark skinned girls to me, as far as features wise.”
Since dark skin color is devalued, some darker skinned women desire lighter skinned children:
I know I would never want, and this is probably bad to say, but I wouldn’t want a kid with a dark skinned man…Just because, I feel I’m dark, I wouldn’t want a real dark child… That’s bad to say isn’t it? Is that real bad to say? …No, I think they’re nice looking…but I’m just saying as far as the breeding thing, that’s just my preference, you know. (UG)
Unlike lighter skinned females, whose “beauty” increased social acceptance, confidence and self-esteem, dark skinned participants discussed how social reaction to their dark skin color negatively impacted their identity:
All through elementary school, I mean I had a complex. I was withdrawn. I was terrified …Throughout elementary, I went to a private Catholic school, and then I went to public junior high school. And all throughout it, I was like one of the darkest sisters in there who wasn’t from Africa…Ooh boy, I used to go through it! I used to go through it! Like I feared walking into big rooms and meeting people. And I think that’s what really caused me to withdraw, because it was like I got attacked wherever I went… (LN)
One older participant remembered a former classmate who has never attended her high school class reunions:
And she always told me it was because…she really didn’t enjoy high school…because of the way some of the kids have, you know, treated her…Because she had a real bad experience when she was in high school, you know…And I know she didn’t necessarily say because she was so dark and she considered herself dark and ugly…She just, you know, she had a bad experience. (NI)
Illustrating the connection between identity, skin color and socio-economic status, a participant described her youngest sister:
She doesn’t have any self esteem. She doesn’t, because she would rather settle…Now, she’s probably qualified to get a better job. She probably really is. But she doesn’t feel that within herself because of her skin tone. I think, where it doesn’t make [lighter skinned blacks] any difference, I think on a scale of 1 to 100, I think [darker skinned blacks] feel 85 percent of the time they are rejected because of their color. (UC)
Clearly, having dark skin can affect identity and socio-economic status.
Black Females, Beauty Constructs, and Hair
Second only to skin color, hair texture and length criteria—also dominant beauty constructs (Weitz, 2004)—can be particularly devastating for black females (Taylor, 1999). Considered “good” or “bad” based on proximity to Eurocentric paradigms (Russell, Wilson, and Hall, 1992; Taylor, 1999), hair is so important to black female identity that one scholar argued,
Beauty Standards Reflect Eurocentric Paradigms 79
“[I]f cultural theorists want to understand how black women and girls view their worlds, it is essential to understand why hair matters to them” (Banks, 2000, 4). Internalization of Eurocentric beauty messages makes black females value longer, straighter hair.
A dark skinned participant, whose hair was short because it grew very slow, said she felt unattractive as a child until getting a jheri curl (a curly perm), which quickly grew her short hair longer. She describes the change in her self-esteem—and the connection to male peer validation:
And then after that, I started looking upon myself that I was…that I was pretty. That I was cute, rather…The boys in my neighborhood told me that I was an ugly duckling and that I had turned into a, a swan. And…that sticks with me to this day…I mean, I was always clean and I was always dressed. But, I just had bad hair…You couldn’t have the pretty flowered dress with the nappy hair. (QX)
Now in her late 30s, this participant has worn weaved hairstyles for well over a decade, even hiding her “bad hair” from her husband. “To be honest,” she states,” I’ve been with my husband for 14 years, and he has never seen [my hair].”
Like skin color, the diversity of black females’ hair means that not all family members share the same hair texture or length. One woman explained how her own shorter hair influenced her desire for a daughter with long hair:
I used to always want long hair. I wanted to be able to, you know, pull it back in a ponytail, and [swing it left and right]. And all that kind of stuff where you know, you put the shirt over your head and pretend like it’s your hair? I used to do that. I used to, I have to honestly say, I used to pray that when I have a baby, because I didn’t have hair like that, when I have a baby, I used to say that I want a [daughter] with long pretty hair… And I got that. (WIK)
In fact, claimed one woman, the desire to have lighter children with “good hair” is also fueling black female/non-black male relationships:
A lot of brown skinned women are going to the [non-black] men. I asked one, “Why are all of your kids [bi-racial]? She said, “I don’t want none of my kids to be dark. I don’t want none of my kids’ hair to be bad.” And she’s got three children and all the kids’ hair is good. None of these children are dark. (UC)
Solutions
Clearly, attempting to fit African features into Eurocentric beauty constructs is a struggle for many black females. Racially defined beauty hierarchies automatically exclude skin color and hair textures common to black people. How can black women resist Eurocentric beauty paradigms? The answer lies in strengthened cultural identities. Participants emphasized the need for black people to redefine beauty from a black rather than white perspective; a need for increased positive family messages to counter negative, culturally dominant messages; and a need to strengthen individual self-acceptance.
To combat dominant beauty standards, which are internalized and affect self-esteem, a re- definition of black female beauty must occur which rejects Eurocentric beauty paradigms. In fact, beauty need not be dependent on physical features at all. “Actually beauty is from inside out,”statedonewoman,“andalotofpeoplehaven’tlearnedthatyet.” Statedanother,“Pretty is as pretty does.” One woman put it bluntly, “I think our perception of beauty will change when we stop letting white people dictate to us what beauty is.”
Redefining beauty means ignoring Eurocentric paradigms that place value on lighter colors while de-valuing darker colors. Particularly for blacks, a redefinition of black female beauty should include, not exclude, the wide variety of skin colors and hair textures common to
80 Cynthia L. Robinson-Moore
African descendants. One participant gives an example of recognizing diversity while ignoring paradigms:
There’s a picture that I seen and it’s called “Black is Black” and it has three shades of black people, because we come in all shades and we’re all beautiful. You know…the very first time I went to Atlanta…Oh my god, I was on a high! I was just on a high! And people couldn’t understand it, but I felt like I was in heaven. Seeing all those black people…I mean, I seen all colors and it was just so beautiful, like a rainbow…I’m getting chills just thinking about it because it’s wonderful. We are so beautiful! And it’s so true. (NUI)
Appreciating all colors rather than valuing one recognizes color diversity as an important beauty asset, not a liability (Asante, 1988; Azibo, 1989).
Important to maintaining a strong cultural identity, redefining black female beauty begins in the home. Participants stressed how positive family messages can counter culturally dominant messages. Yet, family can only communicate what they know:
And, uh, what we have to do as a people is to combat that—dispel that rumor…I think probably the most important messages that we can get is from family. Every household has a different set of values, and it’s probably the message that we get as a family. But the family has to get the message. How does the family get the message that they do count, they do matter? I don’t care how you put them together…You’ve got to have a support system in effect. I don’t care who you are. (QBM)
However, cultural dominance is strong and family support not always consistent. Lacking an external support system, the resistance effort must begin with black females accepting their own individual skin color and hair texture. Resistance, then, can be aided by a strong sense of cultural self-worth. “I think it’s just what people think of themselves,” stated one participant. “I think we keep it going.” Another advised:
Hold your head up! What’s inside is what counts. You just happened to be born in that shell that you’re in…Let it go! And stop being angry! Let’s stop. Let’s bridge this gap that slavery started first. Our own men in our culture escalated it and put it on a higher plane sometimes with the mind games and stuff. And then we bought it! We bit it and bought into it. (EP)
Self-acceptance allows black females to be comfortable with their own individual features, regardless of beauty standards. One participant stated, “If no one else tells you, tell yourself that you’re beautiful. I tell myself that I’m beautiful.”
CONCLUSION AND IMPLICATIONS
Being located within a racialized system that negates blackness, and without a strong collective identity as a referent, blacks in the U.S. have had a long struggle with self-identification issues. Light skinned privileges rooted in slavery created a color caste system that continues to perpetuate a Eurocentric concept of beauty. Both black males and females are influenced by Eurocentric beauty paradigms where the frame of reference for black beauty is not Africa butEuro-America(Arogundade,2000;Taylor,2002). Beingracedandgendered,Eurocentric beauty paradigms particularly affect black females. Dominant beauty standards, while color dominated, are also male dominated, making the experience of having dark, brown or light skin different for black females, many of whom have to fit African features into European beauty constructs. Importantly, attractiveness determines socialization, socio-economic status, and ultimately, mate selection.
Beauty Standards Reflect Eurocentric Paradigms 81
This research used a critical-interpretive approach to examine the impact of Eurocentric beauty standards on black female identities. Specifically, I sought an understanding of individual experiences of black females based on dominant beauty criteria. What is it like for black females considered attractive or unattractive based on Eurocentric constructs? What is the impact on identity?
Results from this study support a relationship between skin color/hair, Eurocentric beauty standards, and black female identity. Yet, it is important to understand that because of the wide array of skin colors and hair textures among black people, not all black females experience Eurocentric beauty paradigms the same. Established beauty paradigms dictate that darker skinned black females with shorter hair are not as attractive as lighter skinned females with longer hair. Depending on placement within beauty constructs, black females experience a variety of communicative responses ranging from privilege and opportunity to discrimination and social isolation. Located within beauty constructs, lighter skinned females discussed the confidence that comes from early forms of acceptance, including privileges, compliments and other forms of validation which positively affect self-esteem. Inversely, darker skinned participants, situated outside of Eurocentric beauty paradigms, remembered being excluded more often than included, triggering feelings of fear, isolation, and lowered self-esteem.
These results are not meant to imply that all dark skinned females have low self- esteem and all light skinned females are confident.4 Nor should this research suggest that, among U.S. blacks, only light skinned females are considered attractive. What the research illustrates is that fitting African features into Eurocentric beauty constructs is communicated to black females as a necessary beauty component. While impact on black female identities is individual specific, lighter skinned females were more likely than darker skinned females to recall positive messages that validated their overall feelings of being attractive. Inversely, darker skinned females had more experiences of negative messages that communicated their unattractiveness. Why is this important? As one dark skinned participant stated, “It’s not just a matter of ‘so’…. You internalize that over time.”
To combat internalized, Eurocentric beauty paradigms and minimize dominant influences on black female beauty choices and perceptions, cultural identity must be strengthened. Women in this study communicated that a re-definition of beauty must occur—one that allows a determination of beauty from an African rather than European perspective. Additionally, there is a need for positive family cultural messages to counter negative societal messages. Ultimately, however, black females must accept their own individual physical characteristics, regardless of beauty paradigms. Self-acceptance allows black females to be comfortable with African features:
Society, depending on what circles, they try to tell me that, you know, I’m not valuable. But, how I would