I still haven't found what I'm looking for...

thisisnotindia:

2brwngrls:

Oh, goodie! More racist fashion editorials! 

This time, it’s Diva magazine’s photospread entitled “Be My Slave.” Pakistani designer Aamna Aqeel decided, for whatever reason, that the best way to showcase her fashions was via these seriously offensive images, which feature a white model clad in chic duds, accompanied by a little boy playing her “slave.”

When confronted about the photos, Aqeel insisted that the spread’s concept was to bring awareness to child labor, and that the fact that the boy is dark-skinned and dressed in ~*tribal*~ gear was purely coincidental. 

However International Herald Tribune writer Salima Feerasta has quite rightly called bullshit on Aqeel’s flimsly excuse, saying: It’s facetious of the designer to claim that she was trying to stimulate a debate on child labour. The model wearing her clothes is clearly comfortable with her dominant position. She is not made up in a way that shows her to be the villain of the piece. The use of a dark skinned child in a shoot entitled “Be My Slave” certainly reeks of racism, however much the designer may deny it. And if anything, the shoot seems to condone child labour.”

What do you guys think? Will the fashion world ever get a clue?

What the ever-loving fuck. 

300000000000000000000% done.

eastafrodite:

The difference between white girls being compelled to tan and brown/black girls shamed for dark skin and led to lightening their skin, is that the former is a fairly new capitalistic marketing gimmick, which surely enough, is a trend that’s not as popular in certain majority white nations as it is in the U.S. (Scandinavian countries being a good example of such), while the other derives from a hegemonic, anti-dark, white supremacist sentiment that’s been used as a means of colonialism, imperialism and racial discrimination, which has been in effect for hundreds of years and led to the destruction and heinous extermination of countless lives.

Does it suck being told you’re pale? Probably. Is it going to bar you from employment, housing and otherwise assimilating into American life? Is anyone going to profile you, follow you around in a store, assume you’re deadly on sight.. for “being too pale”? Does it otherize you? Absolutely not. The latter don’t really have that luxury.

When white girls tan, they’re not being told to emulate brown and black people, while the reversal is. White women who tan are still white, just “bronzed” and “golden” and often use women from Spain and Italy as what the goal should be. The language insinuates that there isn’t anything necessarily wrong with being white. They can still be white and cling to the dominant race, but just be a “different” type of white. Even when darker skin’s the prime, nonwhite/darker skinned individuals are still barred from accessing the privilege of being seen as beautiful or the desired. When brown and black girls bleach their skin however, the advertisements for Fair & Lovely showcase white, or at the very least, white passing persons, which suggests that brown in itself is inherently wrong and gross and something that needs fixing.

Lastly, it’s not brown and black people who put pressure on white women to tan. To call the issue one of race is patently foolish. When white men, who arguably are the forces behind most of these ads for telling white women to tan, it’s an issue of sexism and the continuous reminder that women’s bodies are made only for the consumpation of the male gaze, especially the white male gaze and that our lives are simply one in which we have to appease the opposite sex.

I sympathize with any woman, whether white or not, who’s made to feel uncomfortable in her own skin, but the gravity and influence of with which the two derive are on two different wavelengths completely and it’s ludicrous to suggest otherwise.

(Source: maarnayeri, via realfakescientist)

thisiswhiteprivilege:

karnythia:

crackerhell:

jasminethey:

After Seven Years, Dutch Diplomat Couple Returns their Adopted Korean Daughter

Raymond Poeteray, vice consul at the Dutch Consulate General in Hong Kong, and his wife, Meta, adopted baby “Jade” from South Korea in 2000 at the age of four months. The couple believed themselves to be infertile at the time.

The diplomat’s wife subsequently conceived two biological children. The couple then left their eight-year-old adopted daughter in foster care, claiming she was never able to integrate into their family, and that “it was difficult to raise her because of culture shock.”

Upon the child’s abandonment in Hong Kong, officials discovered that the parents never registered the child as a citizen or even a resident, and she had no legal status or protection under the Dutch, Hong Kong, or Korean governments.

Oh poor baby. :( That is just so fucked up. Fucking white people.

and this is why white people should be stringently watched when adopting PoC babbies.

This couple was also in the news earlier this year accused of espionage which…I can’t say I’m shocked actually to find out that they are morally bankrupt.

In case you wanted to cry or be disgusted today

(Source: )

musaafer:

dapsandhugs:

this week on White People are Wild

is anybody even remotely surprised at this point

Surprise, surprise. 

wtf

(Source: hylianears)

thezombiecharity:

intrusionofthought:

SAGIRA YOU’RE FAMOUS.

(Source: ninjazpenguinzz, via spock1013)

searchingforknowledge:

knowledgeequalsblackpower:

Do you know of Alice Rhinelander?

The New Rochelle, New York annulment trial of Leonard “Kip” Rhinelander and his wife, Alice Jones Rhinelander, was a much-publicized issue in the 1920s which highlighted white America’s definitions of race, class, and marriage.

Alice Jones was the daughter of working-class English immigrants.  Her mother was known to be white, while her father’s ancestry was “mixed.”   Leonard “Kip” Rhinelander was descended from a wealthy, white New York family.

Rhinelander and Jones met in 1921, fell in love, and married in 1924.  Because of the Rhinelander family prestige, the union soon became public.  In the social atmosphere of the 1920s, it was scandalous that Rhinelander would marry a woman of lower socioeconomic class, or who possessed any “non-white” blood.  Rhinelander’s father pushed the annulment lawsuit brought by his son only weeks after the wedding, in which Rhinelander, Jr. charged Mrs. Rhinelander with deceiving him as to her race.  The prosecution argued that if Leonard had known she was “not white,” he would not have married Alice. A leading issue in the trial thus became what Alice Rhinelander’s true race was, bringing into sharp focus the arbitrary nature of white America’s obsession with racial classification during that period.

Attorneys on each side attempted to answer this question using Alice Jones Rhinelander’s social network, her father’s ancestry, and even her language as evidence of her racial status.  The Rhinelander attorneys attempted to paint Leonard as a “dupe” victimized by a “vamp,” playing on sexualized stereotypes of African American women, while defense counsel resorted to desperate means to prove that Rhinelander must have known his bride was not “white” when they induced a stricken Alice to disrobe before the jury (because a determinant of racial identity was allegedly observable in nipple color).

The Rhinelander Trial held the public in its grip for the better part of 1925, with both black and white press weighing in with varying opinions.  Ultimately, on December 6, 1925, the jury ruled in Mrs. Rhinelander’s favor.  Playing on the notion that race can be visually established, the defense attorney successfully “showed” Mrs. Rhinelander to be “colored,”  argued that she could not have deceived her husband, and therefore his claims for annulment were invalid.

Late in 1929, Alice agreed to a divorce in exchange for a small monthly pension, and with the stroke of a pen a Nevada judge erased Kip Rhinelander’s social error. According to the terms of the settlement, Kip Jr. paid Jones a lump sum of $32,500 and $3,600 per year for life if she would disown their family name. Ironically, Jones would outlive her ex-husband by 50 years, passing away in 1989. On her gravestone read the name Alice J. Rhinelander.

(via Mulatto Diaries)

How the hell did the case get to the point where stripping her naked in front of the jury seemed like the thing to do? Disgusting! 

So many issues can be found in this one case. A good book about it is Love on Trial: An American Scandal in Black and White.

Dear god in heaven THEY STRIPPED HER NAKED IN FRONT OF THE JURY. WHITE PPL. 

(via lazy-native)

angryasiangirlsunited:

Lou Jing, Chinese Talent show contestant from Shanghai. Her mother is Chinese and her father is African American. Her attention in the media has opened debates about racism in China.

(via alyp0tat0)

itsjohnsen:

A couple who’d moved into an all-white neighbourhood looks at graffiti scrawled in front of their home. Chicago, 1957.
Francis Miller

(via enchantingnagchampa)

Utterly nauseated by the Slumdog Millionaire stereotype presented in this article and seriously doubting if I’ll ever read TC again. This WOULD be written by a twentysomething white Caucasian male UGH CHECK YOUR PRIVILEGE, ASSHOLE. Just check your fuckin’ privilege and stay the hell out of India, kay?