I’m a former grad and I’m sad I never took this class while in school. These are some really cool classes. The silver lining is now I get to enjoy without the anxiety of test behind it lol. I feel for this professor he is navigating really hard territory so he stumbles a bit to make sure he’s not saying something bad. It’s refreshing to see these conversations happening especially with different backgrounds presented
I will say being a Social Science teacher myself, MOST Sociology classes, esp classes or lessons on race, are NOT taught this way. They are taught "the script." I think every college student should take a class or classes where they receive BALANCED instruction from teachers who don't profess their opinions are facts. He really takes time to set it up and lay the foundation making those students more open to hearing and considering alternative points of view. Sooo important to establish those foundations, norms and not to push an agenda.
I am a proud Canadian, 76 years old and watch these classes every day. I really like the topics being discussed and listening to the points of view and opinions of the students. I have learned a lot of these past several months and have used some of the info' in discussions with friends and family, not always accepted, but Makes me realize how different we all are. The world would be a very boring place if everyone was the same.
From my understanding and experience living in Asia, historically lighter skin is an indicator of class. Upper class having lighter skin and lower class having darker skin as a worker who works outside.
In Russia, though, having tan is about being upper class, since naturally we don't have lots of sun, and tan means one gets to spend their vacation somewhere sunny (which is usually abroad and expensive) 😂
Agreed… But, as someone who lived in Hong Kong, I became familiar with the term “gweilo”, meaning “ghost man” (or “white devil”)… Which, was not affiliated with upper class, but is a derogatory term for Europeans!
Same here. I've been craving conversations like this for years. Since covid, I've lost a lot of friends with different perspectives. I'm starving for different thoughts and ideas
I think it's ridiculous that people claim that the preference for light skin is based on the west imposing their beauty standards on the rest of the world. If that were the case tanning would be the preference, not skin lightening. Also among the Norse, a man with pale skin was seen as a coward, because it indicated that he stayed inside, instead of being outside either working or fighting. Being pale was desirable for women though.
Tans come and fade we are well aware of that. Whites interaction with the rest of the world was based on slavery and colonialism where their skin colour was implied to be superior than others. Darwin's theory of evolution which asserted that the whiter races are superior and further evolved from the animals also comes into play here. White skin is desirous by non whites I suspect because of the implied superiority involved in the racial narrative
I would think it's a different perspective. White people's presence in the media is the majority. It's not as much media saying "White people are better" its that when they go to show "beauty" its generally white people. Or at least for a very long time it was. Just like he said, people have different opinions and perspectives based on their experiences.
@@grasshoppersantwitch6087 yeah but these days you always see black couples or a black guy and a white girl and theres alot of examples of this in ads and in clothes stores pretty much everywhere I mean if anything that's what there really trying to push on to Society I mean I live in Cali so that might explain it but it's also all on the internet and it's most likely just a small part of a bigger agenda they're trying to push but I really think there going about it in a really bad way and are trying to hide that behind compassion My bad I know I didn't write this very well at all
Preference for white skin I think is natural. I think there is a biological factor there as white skin reflect off more light so you see more of them it. Anytime I am editing my picture making it look whiter just makes me look more nicer. The whiter you are the more beautiful you are. But then again just only being white does not mean you are also beautiful. You also have to have beauty factor. Because someone can be white and ugly looking where someone is darker looking but have distinguish black beauty feature that makes it stand out.
In certain countries, having light skin equals wealth. You could distinguish the peasants from the wealthy people by the darkness of their skin. Peasants were in the fields all day long, so they had darker skin. Wealthy people could stay inside or use an umbrella etc. In many cases, it has nothing to do with the whites.
This is a very impressive lecture. 56:14 [Go]Joseon (old Joseon) ~ Go[gu]ryeo (old Goryeo) ~ Goryeo ~ Joseon ~ Korea have preferred light skin. As Dr. Sam Richards said, this is related to social class. When working indoors, Koreans'skin lightens easily. When working under the sun, Koreans'skin darkens easily.
The preference for paler skin goes back to the days when the poor worked all day out in the field and got tanned. The wealthy upper class spend most of their day inside and their skin turned more pale. That way you could visually distinguish if someone was from the upper class or the working class.
So maybe over time if you had certain characteristics you'd end up in the inside instead of in the field. People might think it's racist, but skin color is just not about melanin or tanning or visual. Skin color is much more than skin deep.
People in east Asia prefer lighter skin even before they first met a white person. So it’s nothing to do with wanting to be the white race 😂. It’s just pure aesthetics
I'm a bit surprised about the discussion with the panel of Asian (Korea, India, and China) students. When you asked about why the preference for lighter color skin, they seemed unsure. I lived in Korea, where I met and married my wife of nearly 40 years. We go back to Korea on a regular basis - twice for a month each last year - and headed back for another month in April this year. We've traveled extensively throughout Asia, but I'll use Korea as the frame of reference. Ever since I first lived in Korea 40 years ago, the basis for lighter skin tone was obvious. It is directly related to societal hierarchy. Seeing the lowest level of workers, working outside exposed to the sun, they are clearly the darkest skin tone. Koreans tan quite well in the sun. Something our two sons liked in their teens and twenties growing up in the US. However, in Korea, the lighter skin tones are for those with jobs that allow them to work inside. On a sunny day in Korea, you are just almost as likely to see umbrellas as a rainy day. I can remember traveling to rural Korea in the early 80's and seeing Koreans working on their farms. It struck me that their skin tone was quite dark.
comparing to African American is going bit too far. Even Africans vary. Egyptians, Ethiopians, Nigerian, Kenyan, Sudanese even vary. And I dont think they go that black, more into deep brown
@@thomasday8155 I am pretty down with you but if you want to avoid more people coming back to you with scissors, I recommend you to hyperlink your color of claim with your comment.
Well, you didn’t have to edit your comment due to sensitive people. You had every right to say like African American skin. Some Asians do believe they can’t get as dark as Africans when some Actually do. It’s just that they’ve been conditioned to wear spfs and protect their skin from the sun, where as Africans never used to care about that. Though now some do. When I was in school, all the Asian girls in my class would panic about going dark in the sun. Then rush to wear spfs, yet is black girls would just go and enjoy playing outside. I remember a girl once said how they would go black, when I looked at her she said i don’t mean black like you. Then added asian black is not nice. I mean the dark Indians and Sri Lankans were the most beautiful yet were considered unattractive
I travel to Asia, especially Korea on a regular basis. I have definitely noticed how much the working women in Korea make the extra effort to cover their head when outside. They do whatever they can to limit the sun darkening their skin. Forty years ago there was not as much effort, especially among older women, and they were very dark.
It’s worth noting that up until the past 100 years, or more specifically the past 70-80 years really, westerners also preferred whiter/lighter skin. All historic portraits of royalty and aristocrats heavily emphasise very pale skin, it’s the reason parasols where popular up until Edwardian times, just like in the Korean image shown in this lecture. Pale skin stood for those same key things; wealth, non - labour intensive work (as our economies where also heavily agrarian in nature) , time spent indoors away from the sun. It’s only a recent change in preferences for tanned skin and this is due to the increase in holidays abroad and the shift to a corporate workforce instead of an industrial one. A holiday abroad results in tanned skin, requires money and time. Tanned skin also signals time spent outdoors, previously a negative indication of an industrial worker, it now indicates a privileged deviation from the norm of office workers. Therefore these days the signifiers of wealth in western societies became tanned skin, it shows you have the money and spare time to go on holiday. It also can indicate you occupy a job/position which allows for personal freedom, possibly travel and exploration, rather than a low-rank indoors office job. It’s only a matter of time before what signifies wealth becomes what signifies beauty in most cultures. I wish someone would have noted this and posed the question to the volunteers of whether they see this change or one similar possibly happening in their countries? I would be interested to know what are the identifiers of someone having disposable time and income in these countries and if those identifiers are in anyway linked to beauty in the way they are for westerners as I mentioned above.
Concerning “the west” in this regard, it may be that the United States culture has been different to the European culture. The long history of royals with very white skin was lost in the new world, it wasn’t considered something to emulate. I may be wrong but I don’t think that I have seen pale-faced paintings of Americans that have been and are looked up to, at least nothing close to the depictions of French royalty in the 18th and 19th centuries. Maybe a manifestation of this relationship between someone’s appearance and their social class in America now is the clothes that people wear, and not just how they look but what brand they are which implies how much they cost. Maybe (I say that because I am young, only know about pre-1995 fashion from media, and haven’t talked with anyone older about this) t-shirts used to have been “working class” attire whereas button down collared shirts would be “middle class or upper class attire. Now those lines seem blurred in the modern day but the brand of clothing has a bigger value to the wearer and the observer.
@@lbrown8167 up until the late Golden Age in America (early 20th century, equal to the British Edwardian era I mentioned), fashions, social norms and beauty standards still aligned heavily with those within Europe and the UK - for the one we discuss here that is to be pale/bright skinned. You are correct in noting the absence of notable painted portraits of American nobility of this time. While America most certainly was carving out its own standards and beginning to define its own ‘American’ look of beauty, this absence of portraiture is not really due to that factor, but rather the increase in mass photography. It was by then the fashion to have ones photograph taken upon important occasions, lessening the extent to which one could be depicted with that extremely pale skin you mentioned seen in earlier centuries’ European portraiture. Also simply, photographs where in black and white, so the ‘brightness’ of one’s skin would inevitably be dulled even if they managed to have skin top KPop idols would envy today. I guess the main takeaway here is that even though we discuss the pale/bright skin of generations past, they too likely struggled meet their own beauty standards just as we do today. Things would be much easier if we could naturally love the skin we’re in. Additionally, America had fought hard for independence, it is no surprise that post 18th century monarchy-style portraits of Americans are uncommon as those portraits represent everything a whole war waged over. Again, many pre Independence portraits are in this style and do depict very pale skin as was the accepted beauty standard for the class of people who are getting a portrait done. The overarching point here, is that you are correct in your point that this beauty standard is less obvious at the end of the Golden Age in America - I would only counter that the visibility of the beauty standard, for modern viewers attempting to look back at evidence, is what changed and not the standard itself. For the rest of your comment I completely agree! Wealth is most definitely shown through materialism in the modern world and people with pretty clothes, shiny jewellery and fancy cars are viewed as enviable/desirable. The effect to which this has changed the beauty standard towards skin colour though, I would say is lacking. It most definitely changed standards of wealth, just not the one I referred to in my original comment to do with skin colour. Thank You for your comment though! It’s really cool to be able to discuss EDIT; I should note this is a white-centric feature of upper class society within both European and American culture during this time period. There is a wealth more discussion to be had on how beauty standards for light skin affected black/indigenous/latino and many other cultures existing alongside these beauty standards in such strict and of course, racist, societies. I do not wish to seem to be discounting this, merely following on from the discussion within the original lecture pertaining to multiple cultures preferring the lighter shades of their skin tones. I wished to point out that Caucasians too preferred the lightest version of their skin tone for the vast amount of our history as white people liking to be tanned is of course addressed as an anomaly in the lecture
I'd say that it makes the perfect argument to "end racism" as much as that could ever be possible. Race will always play some part. Just like gender, sexual orientation, fill in the blank will play SOME role in opinions and decisions. But the over arching biggest factor, across cultures, across the globe, will always be class. The haves vs the have nots. People always want to be the better class because They all want their children to have a better life than they did. That's the thing that is equal across every single human being. And the most noticeable thing that means they had a better life, was lighter skin. Because you can't have lighter skin AND have a job with intense labor, in the sun, day after day. So it boils down to every parent's desire, for their children to be better off than they were. To end as much suffering as possible in any way. But suffering also makes character. So it's a balance that will always be wrong on one side or the other. A spoiled rich kid will never be as strong as someone who rose up from the gutter. But no parent ever wants their kid to have to ever experience what the gutter looks like. It's messy. Like all of humanity is.
@Emma Dow You are somewhat right in general, but misunderstand the origins. White people preferring tanned skin did not happen as a result of a change from industrialization to corporate work 100 years ago, it was a direct result of the industrial revolution 260 years ago. Up until that point, most poor people were farmers working in the sun. A result of the industrial revolution was the opening of factories. So poor people came in from the fields and started working inside factories, resulting in their skin becoming paler. It also created a new class of wealthy people, so there were a lot more rich people with disposable incomes. People started becoming tanned because of their leisure activities, travelling and going on holidays in the sun etc... Thus tanned became a desirable trait. Poor = pale white & Tanned = Wealthy. Asia hasn't moved past the Farmer = Poor = Dark skin stereotype yet, but it is changing.
I am extremely impressed with this man’s ability to navigate contentious issues with humor and intelligence. I am 65 years old man and have been struggling with issues of race, culture, social issues and whatever since I was a teenager and have some fairly strong opinions about certain issues and others that I am still completely baffled about. I would love to be able to communicate with this man because there are certain things that I think are kind of bizarre in the responses of the people commenting or even some of the students. One of the ones is the issue with white skin in Asia. People keep saying it’s because they want to look like little babies. At least in Southeast Asia where I have lived for over two years on and off and have many Thai and Laotian friends, white skin is highly valued. The movie stars and the television actors are almost exclusively 50-50 which means that they are half white and half Thai and they have white skin and more western features. That is not about looking like a baby. This IMHO is a universal prejudice about lighter skin. As many people mentioned, dark skin is associated with farm work or outdoor toil and light skin is associate with affluence, indoor work, professional work, etc. I’m trying to find the name of this professor who I give major kudos for for taking on difficult topics with such elan, but I seem to be struggling to find the institution that he is associated with it or his name. It looks like his classes are quite popular and I’m not the least bit surprised. I’m also not surprised at the inherent limited views on some of these issues by the students because it seems like they’ve been indoctrinated since a very young age with these notions of white supremacy, systemic racism etc. I do think I have something to add to the conversation. I went to an inner-city school, I have many inner city friends and I talk about stuff with people all over the world. I’ve traveled extensively throughout the world and I like to engage with people. Not just the people in the hotels or taxi drivers I like to talk to people who are working on the street or that I meet on buses and trains and granted since I don’t generally speak the language I’m getting the views of people who are maybe better educated because they do speak some English but a lot of these people i communicate with on very limited terms because I do understand some of the words in the language and they understand nonverbal communication and maybe the occasional words in English. I think conversations surrounding race, social and cultural issues in the knighted states are so messed up and while he said they are complicated wish to sub since they are on another since they are very simple. People are very predictable and I think it is so important to understand that we need to hear what people are saying but we also need to look at Situations from an understanding of human nature and also from the general experience of living in a fairly open democratic society which is the most racially, culturally, socially and perhaps politically diverse country in the history of the world. That means we are going to have diversion opinions and some fairly strongly held antipathies towards those that don’t look or think like us. But these things are predictable and I think in many ways very understandable. I do think it’s important that we don’t get too wrapped up in these supposed to complexity of any of these issues because that just makes all of us victims of uncertainty and other issues surrounding differences in class, economic status, race, religion And political views. I’m a big fan of people like Thomas Sowell, Douglas Murray, Candace Owen, Andrew Doyle, James Lindsay and other western speakers that try to speak intelligently from a place of knowledge and research instead of focusing on feelings or emotions rather than what is actually going on in and what has happened throughout history, including history of the past 60+ years or so which is very well documented.
This dude is enormously simplistic in his approach. Somehow in all of his experiments, Africans and African Americans are almost always shown to be at the bottom of the racial barrel . Yet, African Americans have an outsized positive influence on the world.
You must have liked it when Candace Owen made a statement about Hitler making everything in his country good, if you don't believe me just look it up on TH-cam! But since you like Candace Owen I know you approve of such talk!
The answer is so simple yet alludes so many. Living in a province you work outside and your skin gets darker. Living in the city and being able to work indoors managing a business or having the finances to have others work for you means you're more prosperous. It's that simple. In addition, when Europeans showed up with their technology for trade they didn't dispel this image. I watched a conversation with Filipina's about the type of women American men want. The things they prioritize, one of them being skin color, put those women in the reject class in their culture. This is why I tell people when discussing slavery in America that a group of elites saw an opportunity to take advantage of a commonly held understanding of lighter skin meaning more prosperous to create laws that benefitted them. You know what political cartoons you never see anymore are? Those that made fun of Irishmen and Asians. Africans weren't the only ones to be taken advantage of. In addition, let's not even get started on the slave trade that existed in Africa before any Europeans showed up to capitalize on it when looking for additional labor options since they didn't have enough prisoners to do the labor they needed. You should be proud of how quickly Americans started fighting against slavery following the Revolution. Slavery was common place worldwide at the time. Anyway.....this ain't my middle school social studies class so I'll get off my little soap box. Legislation regarding skin color = bad. Preference for skin colors = neutral. Preference for lighter skinned versions of your own ethnicity = Potential Prosperity.
Skip to around 30:00 where he’s explaining that you can be totally uneducated about these topics, and strongly opinionated. If it’s “as simple as that”, why do trends change over time, back and forth, etc.? Why do different cultures value light skin, others value tans, others value dark skin? Because you can’t explain all social phenomena by making random guesses about evolutionary biology. Lastly, regarding slavery: Were Hitler’s soldiers justified in their deeds because that was the way of doing things at the time in Nazi Germany? No? Then how is chattel slavery historically justified by it being commonplace? There were abolitionists at the founding of the US. People knew it was wrong. It seems to me your opinions are based off of total ignorance of the cultures you’re discussing, cherry-picked historical facts, and a sort of guessing-game evolutionary biology. I wouldn’t be confident standing on such a rickety foundation if I were you.
@@charliekowittmusic I started to go into great depth to respond to your questions since ethnic studies and history is literally my field of expertise. However, the TH-cam comment section is probably not the place to go into this. What I will say is: History is messy and rarely as cut and dry as we want it to be. The relatively small and growing contingent of Abolitionists in the 18th Century is the very reason why we moved away from slavery and indentured servitude at all. The subject is so complex. I mean, all white men didn't even get the right to vote in the US until 1856 for crying out loud. Land ownership, tax laws, and a few other laws were used to disenfranchise even white men from voting for 60 years. Interesting enough, the election of Lincoln a few years later was a major catalyst to the Civil War. Anyway, the point is that you're right in that much of what happened around the subject of slavery was morally wrong. For millenia, the concept of slavery wasn't really considered morally wrong. The question of morality was in how you treated your slaves, and in all honesty, the majority of slave owners didn't treat their slaves poorly if not solely based on the grounds that every capable slave was equivalent in cost to owning a home. On that note, only about 1.4% of the US population at the height of slavery actually owned a slave. Like today, with the power of tech billionaires, it was a select few in power that dominated the cultural mindset at the time. Acceptance of slavery was a practice as far back as human records go and many of those in power wanted to see the practice continued. Re-shaping such an ingrained mindset took time and sacrifice. We can't even really comprehend what it was like to live under that mindset today because the Abolitionist movement was ultimately successful.
This is a great conversation. I love what the boy on the right said about what people think of Americans when in his country. Black people & White people are viewed the same in other countries, we’re all viewed as Americans. I wish that’s what we could go back to here in America. I hate the way the country has become.
In the Western countries, there used to be a preference for white skin also ( until 1940's?). That is why ladies used parasols and stayed out of the sun. Darker skin was for working class people, not so different from other cultures around the world. It changed when people had money to go on holidays (to warmer climates?). Holidays were for the wealthy only, so if you had tanned skin, you had money and time to spend ( abroad?) a way of showing your wealth.
It actually goes further back than that people started tanning in the 1920s when Coco Chanel came back from Europe with a tan tan and became popular in the 1920s because it meant that you could afford to go outside of the country. Pale skin was very popular during the Victorian era.
A “preference for whiter skin” seems odd to me, because when I was growing up in the 80’s, people were teased for having very light skin, and you might be called a “ghost”. We were expected to tan in the summer and later in, tanning salons became popular. I think dermatologists tried to popularize whiter skin because they didn’t want people tanning themselves into skin cancer. I didn’t hear anyone really preferring lighter skin until I moved to a more diverse community and had some helpful black friends who taught me more about the culture they grew up in, where someone might have light skin that was preferred over darker skin, or “good hair” which was less curly. It was a foreign concept to me. I told my friends how in my community people desired to have curly hair and darker skin. We concluded that people always want what they don’t have, and the real work is to learn to love what God gave you.
As a Korean I would like to say this. The "white" skin the Korean people talk about indicates the white, milky, bright, and pure and clean skin of like their babies, not the white people's white skin. Remember that most of the Korean young men (of course not every man) like baby faced girls with baby skin-like skin, and you will easily find many examples of idol girls in the Kpop insdustry. This is what foreign people usually misunderstand about it. Actually the Korean girl in that video, Lea's skin can probably be an example of the 'white' skin the Korean people prefer.
i second this. I grew up in South East Asia and lots of people see white skin as beauty standard, but it's always the soft and white skin of newborn babies. there's nothing to do with the skin from white people, at least from my experience. on the other hand, they see darker skin people as poor, low education. even in the past they call darker skin people as "savages". there are of course some levels of discrimination there. but this stems from the history of wealthy vs hard labor, and has nothing to do with the skin of white people or African descendants as many Americans think. In history, the wealthy stayed inside most of the time, they didn't do hard labor which exposed them to bright sunlight (remember that Asian skin is much more sensitive to sunlight)
@@mryantong yeah it makes sense because lighter skin is a neotenous feature, and neoteny is a part of femininity which is seen as pretty and beautiful. and more neotenous males are often more intelligent slower and more developed
@@tayzk5929 in Southeast Asia, the more lighter the women is, the feminine she will be, on the other hand the tanner the male is the masculine he will bd
So having the physics major made me think of this point. We want to focus on one thing, but it is always a mix of multiple variables. And explaining multiple variables is so hard to do in a concrete way like mathematics, that it took Newton literally inventing calculus to describe gravity from two sources determining how something moves through space. So to try and reduce a complex problem to something so simple, as "it's ALL racism" or its "ALL personal responsibility" is impossible until the equivalent of a Newton literally invents a new way of speaking in a sense. And people want everything to be black or white, 2+2=4. And that wouldn't be possible to explain the complexities of these issues, like Newton trying to explain the complexities of multi planetary movement.
I wonder if in the US and Europe, the reason tanning is popular now is that only people who have time to tan are those who do not have full-time office jobs. In the past, women in the US wore hats and gloves so they wouldn't tan. In the past, not having to work outdoors was status thing.
This class makes the best case for having diversity on a college campus. Very cool to have so many different ethnic groups to learn from, perfect for sociology, of course wouldnt matter as much if any for math and science.
In many cultures lighter skin signifies wealth. Just like being fat used to signify health. Only wealthy people could afford to not be outside getting tanned by the sun. Just like they were the only ones who could afford to be fat. So both traits were considered positive or attractive.
the idea continued largely to modern day due to colonization. Thats also what influenced ideas of skin whitening as well as more european features being preferred
54:45 You should've talked about the preinstalled face filters that come with phones nowadays. In east-asia it makes the face brighter and the facial features more child-like. In America and Europe it's trying to give you some version of a Kardashian-look. Would be awesome to ask the participants what face filters they use (if they use any)
Why don’t the students know about the social status. Peasants were dark as they worked in the fields. The rich and “beautiful” didn’t work outside hence a lighter colour. The more I listened the more amazed how being told something influences you so much that you don’t know why you think this.
I was thinking the same thing. However, I feel it has been so engrained into our brains, that fair skin is beautiful, so much that some of these students don't even know how it came to be the social beauty standard.
To have white skin meant that the person doesnt have to work out in the sun , in the past people used to call aristocrats blue blood , because their veins were visible under their very pale skin . The darker the persons skin was the lower his position in the society was - It was obvious that he is forced to spend time out working .
So does today's "racism" standard actually stem from Product Advertising? White people tan, spray tan, buy products to darken themselves. In other countries they ae encouraged to lighten...🤔
The difference is that the student knew he was not knowledgeable on the subject and could only offer an opinion. However, most people give their opinion thinking they are knowledgeable on the subject.
The whitening product in Korea is not a white product. If there's a product like that, There will be no one to worry about because of the skin color. There is no such product in the world. There may be such a misunderstanding because of the product name. The purpose of whitening products is to make your skin bright and clean. As you can see, it doesn't make it white. Bright and clean means... It's not white or dark. It means that it gives a glow by making your skin beautiful and good. "Your skin is white!"It's dark~! I've never heard of it in my life while living in Korea. " Your skin is so good!" "I got something on my skin because I'm tired~!" I talk about my skin condition a lot. As I said above, good skin is a condition where the skin texture is beautiful and soft, glowing and clean. Whether your skin is white or dark is not particularly important. I'll see if my skin is in bad condition. Many people envy people with good skin conditions and say they are openly envious.
Yeah ive noticed that too . Over there its not about whiteness but about perfect flawless skin lol sam richards is being dishonest once again and ridiculous but to be fair its not his fault media news and so on potrays it as skin whitening ive noticed from western news. Smh this is why i dont get news from the west as they domt know anything about anything especially about foreign places. I refuse to see news from those places.
When I visited Korea one thing I noticed was how people seemed to have paler faces and darker necks. Basically they use foundations that are lighter than they actually are. That suggests that they want 'whiter' skin. Also KPop celebrities before and afters in terms of appearance before they go lt famous show cosmetic procedures where skin lightening is a must for a 'glow up'.
@@ifeifesi It is often seen in 20-year-olds or high school students who have just started putting on makeup. you haven't been to korea lol Koreans prefer natural and light makeup
I love how that kid said something about the white centering in medicine lol and the professor destroys him. This is the problem with intellectuals, they think they know but the don't know sh*t lol and the professor God bless him acknowledged this and I hope these kids heard what he was saying
In the US and Europe, having light skin was traditionally considered “Fashionable” or desirable, much like in Asia. My grand mother (or European descent) would powder her face to look more fair skinned, because when she was young, that was the thing. It was because (like in Asia) most “common” people worked in the fields and had a tan. And wealthy people did not have to work in the Sun. Women would wear hats and head scarves and even veils (look at pictures of Jackie Kennedy) to avoid the son. Once we industrialize more and most jobs were indoors, the working class were not exposed to the sun as much, but wealthy people had leisure time to be out doors. So looking tan became much more fashionable.
omg this is what i have been wanting americans to talk about!finally. american dont seem to understand the way the rest of the world views race. and it shows
I'm 60 years old. When I was a teen I was Punk Rock. I chose not to go to college so I wouldn't get brainwashed further. A lifetime of odd jobs allowed free time for surfing and chasing girls. If I knew there were teachers and classes like this I would have gone to school. Fortunately I read a lot of nonfiction. I quit reading when I got an iPhone a few years ago. I'm glad I can watch these classes now.
I'm using my phone to have access to these lectures without needing to go to school. Non-fiction and fiction are both valuable, knowledge can be extracted from everything. I also recommend the thousands of audiobooks on TH-cam, never stop learning!
It seems to me that the ideal look in parts of Asia could be described as "the porcelaine doll girls" (?) Maybe their image of beauty was inspired by the porcelaine figures they produced as well as paleness as a sign of wealth?
he is not as loud and as strict as Jordan Peterson...but i think he is doing the most wonderful work, Getting students to think critically and thats a tough job.
It was a different time, but my instructors/professors didn’t allow lateness, ball caps, hoods up or slumping down in our chairs… and it was an extremely liberal private art college.
Less than 100 years ago, Europeans and Americans also valued pale skin because they were also agricultural societies. It’s even in the name. “Fair” means both beautiful and white. This was true long before other races were integrated into the society.
We in Germany were actually lied to by US-imposed politicians after the war: "There are some guest-workers coming, but they will go home again." Now every year there are more schools where there is Not a single german student anymore. It's Anti-White Policy.
I find this so ironic about South Asia. The two most beautiful women I have ever personally known were both very dark complected women from Pakistan. And no, I wasn't the only one who noticed.
That’s called personal preference. This lecture example was not about personal preferences at all, and in fact, the professor was trying to get them to go more deeply into that point…. That it wasn’t about the most beautiful girl YOU have seen. It’s about the general public and their overarching beauty standards.
Until recently, fair skin has always been a sign wealth. Working class agrarian people had to work outside so they would get tan. Later this idea was reinforced by colonialism.
Preference for white skin is not enforced by colonialism. White skin looks beautiful -- looks youthful, smooth, bright, glowing. With dark skin you cant easily see this. Thats the number 1 reason why most of the world like in Asia have preference of white skin.
It's difficult to talk about this issue as a white person. It feels like a lot of people are out to find one wrong thing you say and then blast you for it.
I think only showing the reasons for the desire of lighter skin in Asian people leaves out the universality of that desire. In Europe a lighter skin was also a sign of nobility, or rather not needing to work outside in the sunlight.
When you talk about Korean men, I think you mean skincare. Skincare. Not so much make up. Korean skincare really is wonderful. There are often brightening properties, but it’s not about looking “white”. It’s really not about race. It’s about looking healthy; with skin that’s clear, transparent, celestial, blemish free, glowing, angelic, milky, glassy, baby skin. Not European. Not pink.
Racism is the dislike of a person or group simply based on the appearance of their skin tone. I can dislike Asian or Black people based on my previous experiences with people of that appearance. Those are two totally different life experience situations. As long as that experience is not too minimal, As in five occurrences or a hundred. If I have had twenty years of bad experiences, I’m not racist for that dislike because of extended experiences…as long as I reevaluate each time I move to different cities or regions. In the ideal situation, I would reevaluate every individual person. However, that can be counterproductive. If I spend to much time evaluating one individual person, I loose time to evaluate the next.
46:40 , in my country New Zealand, there's generally a preference for darker skin. It's the pale skinned people who are likely to be passed over e.g. in the dating pool. It's not 'cool' here to be pale. This has resulted in a lot of pale skinned people paying a lot of money to 'beautify' their skin with e.g. cosmetics/makeup & spray tans. Pale skinned people often are asked if they are ok, as in healthy, and dark skinned people presumed to be healthier. Here, pale skinned = sickly, weak, insipid, unreliable, lower down in the societal pecking order. Dark skinned = robustly healthy & strong, reliable, higher up in the social pecking order.
I've heard two explanations on why lighter skin is considered more attractive or desirable in east asian countries, either, neither, or both could be true or false, plus other factors: 1: darker skin is associated with working outside in the fields (more sun) so lighter skinned people work inside and would have a correlation with being wealthier or more intelligent. 2: all the powers that invaded and took power over the centuries were lighter skinned people, so lighter skin was associated with being more powerful/wealthy from that as well
White skin looks beautiful -- looks youthful, smooth, bright. With dark skin you cant easily see this. Thats the number 1 reason why most of the world like in Asia have preference of white skin.
내 얼굴이 하얀 이유는 썬크림을 바르기 때문이고 햇빛으로부터 피부를 보호해서 오랫동안 좋은피부와 젊음을 유지하고 싶기 때문입니다.몸은 태닝해도 상관 없지만 절대 얼굴은 안합니다.그리고 한국은 여름에 태닝해도 반년후 겨울이 지나면 다시 하얀피부로 돌아옵니다...특히 저는 햇빛에 태닝하지 않고 태닝샵에서 합니다.햇빛에 태닝하면 피부노화가 빨리 진행되기 때문입니다.평소에는 반드시 선크림을 바르고 다닙니다.뭐 대충 한국인의 한명으로써의 생각과 행동입니다 ㅋㅋㅋ
Its obvious this professor is a card carrying liberal but he is very respectful of other opinions and life experience. He is very thought provoking and shows the errors in the thought process of modern day liberalism and the progressive thought process if you can refer to it as an actual process
It might be interesting to know that fair skin was also prized amongst certain white cultures long before their exposure to darker skinned people. So even white people wanted to be whiter. I also think this may have been due to class and sun exposure. The new tan phenomenon is an american invention in my opinion and has since become popular in certain other western countries.
That's exactly how it is in Germany with Americans. When we meet an American, the characteristic is: American. Skin color doesn't matter, we don't differentiate between black, white, native, latin american.
You need to have a class on ethnicity and race i was taught there were only five races just a lot of different ethnicities these kids don't seem to understand that
This is about class not race. The elite didn't expose themselves to the elements so they had lighter skin....even European elites powdered their faces to adhere to this.
From an evolutionary point of view, darker skinned people are able to enjoy the outdoors in the sunshine for longer than severely melanin challenged light skinned people. That's an evolutionary advantage for dark skinned people. Sadly, fashion and classism ( see for example 27:20 where northwest Europeans are historically featured in illustrations in journals & guidance manuals ) has made paler skin fashionable, even if naturally paled skinned people have the constant inconvenience of having to always to slather their skin with sunblock, wear broad brimmed hats, and even avoid the sun altogether - - this is all very limiting on a pale skinned person's freedom to have to always worry about getting sunburnt with the accompanying risk of deadly skin cancer. Whereas a dark skinned person can readily head out into the sunny outdoors & not need to bother with planning ahead to have loads of sunblock cream, long sleeved shirt, and broad brimmed hat. Pale skinned people would suffer if they had an outdoors job - they are limited to only mostly _in_ doors work. It makes no sense to me that racism exists that is prejudiced against _darker_ skin, when surely being _light_ skinned is inferior, from an evolutionary point of view.
Fair skin is more advantageous for drawing nourishment from the sun, which helped humans survive in northern winters. Then when the sun is too much, they get a tan. In tropical environments there is always too much sun, so skin didn't evolve to get lighter. If you only understand half of this argument, you would either expect all humans to be black, or conclude that humans originated in Sweden and evolved as they moved towards the tropics.
나는 자외선 차단제를 항상 바릅니다. 그 이유는 햇빛으로부터 피부를 보호하고 노화를 방지하기 위해서 입니다.태닝은 태닝샵에서 합니다.해수욕장에서는 옷을 입고 수영을합니다.자외선 차단제를 바르지 않은 사람과 30년후 얼굴을 비교하면 당신이 어떤 피부색을 가지고 태어났는지와 상관없이 자외선 차단제를 바르고 싶어질겁니다.😂
Answer to question is never. I dont look at amything anymore through the prism of race. I look at what people do or say as either right or wrong good or evil.
I think it's for the intended purpose of making the students feel comfortable being in front of so many people and saying things that might sound dumb to some people..
Pale/light skin definitely stemmed from the "Class system" Royalty/Aristocracy/Upper Class never worked a day's graft outside therefore had skin almost as see through as the most "Brassy ginger" person you've ever seen *the ones that have green freckles and smell like sugarpuffs* Middle class almost as milky white being mostly banker wankers/lawyers/Doctors and office 9-5 day's Working Class the skin sun-kissed, what you see is what you get, not backwards at coming forward, THICK skinned. (My favourite kind) Lower and poor... Obviously no need to explain. We all know why such a Class exists, especially the first one I mentioned.
I can see that a Korean student is very calm and confident about her insight. By the way, Westerners are not white men or white skinned persons rather than red. Ancient Korean are looked perfectly.
I am glad this professor didnt get canceled/fired for what he is doing
He's been doing it for years too.
Probably complaints with the words "uncomfortable" "harm" in it.
There's a reason for the cameras. It's required
Such a revolutionary 😂
Common sense
I’m a former grad and I’m sad I never took this class while in school. These are some really cool classes. The silver lining is now I get to enjoy without the anxiety of test behind it lol. I feel for this professor he is navigating really hard territory so he stumbles a bit to make sure he’s not saying something bad. It’s refreshing to see these conversations happening especially with different backgrounds presented
I will say being a Social Science teacher myself, MOST Sociology classes, esp classes or lessons on race, are NOT taught this way. They are taught "the script." I think every college student should take a class or classes where they receive BALANCED instruction from teachers who don't profess their opinions are facts.
He really takes time to set it up and lay the foundation making those students more open to hearing and considering alternative points of view. Sooo important to establish those foundations, norms and not to push an agenda.
I thought this was anthropology
A brave man ❤️
I am a proud Canadian, 76 years old and watch these classes every day. I really like the topics being discussed and listening to the points of view and opinions of the students. I have learned a lot of these past several months and have used some of the info' in discussions with friends and family, not always accepted, but Makes me realize how different we all are. The world would be a very boring place if everyone was the same.
I am a 71 year old us citizen and i agree with your comments.
From my understanding and experience living in Asia, historically lighter skin is an indicator of class. Upper class having lighter skin and lower class having darker skin as a worker who works outside.
Same in Mexico
Same in Europe
In Russia, though, having tan is about being upper class, since naturally we don't have lots of sun, and tan means one gets to spend their vacation somewhere sunny (which is usually abroad and expensive) 😂
Agreed… But, as someone who lived in Hong Kong, I became familiar with the term “gweilo”, meaning “ghost man” (or “white devil”)… Which, was not affiliated with upper class, but is a derogatory term for Europeans!
That's the way of the world.
I can't stop binge watching these classes.
It should be mandatory 😂
Same! Brings me hope about humanity.
Same!! It makes me want to be a sociology major
Same here. I've been craving conversations like this for years. Since covid, I've lost a lot of friends with different perspectives. I'm starving for different thoughts and ideas
Same!!!!!
I think it's ridiculous that people claim that the preference for light skin is based on the west imposing their beauty standards on the rest of the world. If that were the case tanning would be the preference, not skin lightening.
Also among the Norse, a man with pale skin was seen as a coward, because it indicated that he stayed inside, instead of being outside either working or fighting. Being pale was desirable for women though.
Tans come and fade we are well aware of that. Whites interaction with the rest of the world was based on slavery and colonialism where their skin colour was implied to be superior than others. Darwin's theory of evolution which asserted that the whiter races are superior and further evolved from the animals also comes into play here. White skin is desirous by non whites I suspect because of the implied superiority involved in the racial narrative
I would think it's a different perspective. White people's presence in the media is the majority. It's not as much media saying "White people are better" its that when they go to show "beauty" its generally white people. Or at least for a very long time it was.
Just like he said, people have different opinions and perspectives based on their experiences.
@@grasshoppersantwitch6087 yeah but these days you always see black couples or a black guy and a white girl and theres alot of examples of this in ads and in clothes stores pretty much everywhere I mean if anything that's what there really trying to push on to Society
I mean I live in Cali so that might explain it but it's also all on the internet
and it's most likely just a small part of a bigger agenda they're trying to push but I really think there going about it in a really bad way and are trying to hide that behind compassion
My bad I know I didn't write this very well at all
Preference for white skin I think is natural. I think there is a biological factor there as white skin reflect off more light so you see more of them it. Anytime I am editing my picture making it look whiter just makes me look more nicer. The whiter you are the more beautiful you are. But then again just only being white does not mean you are also beautiful. You also have to have beauty factor. Because someone can be white and ugly looking where someone is darker looking but have distinguish black beauty feature that makes it stand out.
In certain countries, having light skin equals wealth. You could distinguish the peasants from the wealthy people by the darkness of their skin. Peasants were in the fields all day long, so they had darker skin. Wealthy people could stay inside or use an umbrella etc. In many cases, it has nothing to do with the whites.
This is very important work he is doing. He has such a way of facilitating open conversations about such sensitive topics
This is a very impressive lecture.
56:14 [Go]Joseon (old Joseon) ~ Go[gu]ryeo (old Goryeo) ~ Goryeo ~ Joseon ~ Korea have preferred light skin.
As Dr. Sam Richards said, this is related to social class.
When working indoors, Koreans'skin lightens easily.
When working under the sun, Koreans'skin darkens easily.
The preference for paler skin goes back to the days when the poor worked all day out in the field and got tanned. The wealthy upper class spend most of their day inside and their skin turned more pale. That way you could visually distinguish if someone was from the upper class or the working class.
So maybe over time if you had certain characteristics you'd end up in the inside instead of in the field.
People might think it's racist, but skin color is just not about melanin or tanning or visual. Skin color is much more than skin deep.
Do Albinos in Tanzania get white privilege also
People in east Asia prefer lighter skin even before they first met a white person. So it’s nothing to do with wanting to be the white race 😂. It’s just pure aesthetics
I'm a bit surprised about the discussion with the panel of Asian (Korea, India, and China) students. When you asked about why the preference for lighter color skin, they seemed unsure.
I lived in Korea, where I met and married my wife of nearly 40 years. We go back to Korea on a regular basis - twice for a month each last year - and headed back for another month in April this year. We've traveled extensively throughout Asia, but I'll use Korea as the frame of reference.
Ever since I first lived in Korea 40 years ago, the basis for lighter skin tone was obvious. It is directly related to societal hierarchy.
Seeing the lowest level of workers, working outside exposed to the sun, they are clearly the darkest skin tone. Koreans tan quite well in the sun. Something our two sons liked in their teens and twenties growing up in the US.
However, in Korea, the lighter skin tones are for those with jobs that allow them to work inside. On a sunny day in Korea, you are just almost as likely to see umbrellas as a rainy day.
I can remember traveling to rural Korea in the early 80's and seeing Koreans working on their farms. It struck me that their skin tone was quite dark.
comparing to African American is going bit too far. Even Africans vary. Egyptians, Ethiopians, Nigerian, Kenyan, Sudanese even vary. And I dont think they go that black, more into deep brown
Like an African American!? It's totally wrong!! Gone way to far!!
@@thomasday8155 I am pretty down with you but if you want to avoid more people coming back to you with scissors, I recommend you to hyperlink your color of claim with your comment.
Well, you didn’t have to edit your comment due to sensitive people. You had every right to say like African American skin. Some
Asians do believe they can’t get as dark as Africans when some
Actually do. It’s just that they’ve been conditioned to wear spfs and protect their skin from the sun, where as Africans never used to care about that. Though now some do.
When I was in school, all the Asian girls in my class would panic about going dark in the sun. Then rush to wear spfs, yet is black girls would just go and enjoy playing outside.
I remember a girl once said how they would go black, when I looked at her she said i don’t mean black like you. Then added asian black is not nice. I mean the dark Indians and Sri Lankans were the most beautiful yet were considered unattractive
I travel to Asia, especially Korea on a regular basis. I have definitely noticed how much the working women in Korea make the extra effort to cover their head when outside. They do whatever they can to limit the sun darkening their skin.
Forty years ago there was not as much effort, especially among older women, and they were very dark.
It’s worth noting that up until the past 100 years, or more specifically the past 70-80 years really, westerners also preferred whiter/lighter skin. All historic portraits of royalty and aristocrats heavily emphasise very pale skin, it’s the reason parasols where popular up until Edwardian times, just like in the Korean image shown in this lecture.
Pale skin stood for those same key things; wealth, non - labour intensive work (as our economies where also heavily agrarian in nature) , time spent indoors away from the sun.
It’s only a recent change in preferences for tanned skin and this is due to the increase in holidays abroad and the shift to a corporate workforce instead of an industrial one.
A holiday abroad results in tanned skin, requires money and time. Tanned skin also signals time spent outdoors, previously a negative indication of an industrial worker, it now indicates a privileged deviation from the norm of office workers.
Therefore these days the signifiers of wealth in western societies became tanned skin, it shows you have the money and spare time to go on holiday. It also can indicate you occupy a job/position which allows for personal freedom, possibly travel and exploration, rather than a low-rank indoors office job.
It’s only a matter of time before what signifies wealth becomes what signifies beauty in most cultures.
I wish someone would have noted this and posed the question to the volunteers of whether they see this change or one similar possibly happening in their countries? I would be interested to know what are the identifiers of someone having disposable time and income in these countries and if those identifiers are in anyway linked to beauty in the way they are for westerners as I mentioned above.
Concerning “the west” in this regard, it may be that the United States culture has been different to the European culture. The long history of royals with very white skin was lost in the new world, it wasn’t considered something to emulate. I may be wrong but I don’t think that I have seen pale-faced paintings of Americans that have been and are looked up to, at least nothing close to the depictions of French royalty in the 18th and 19th centuries. Maybe a manifestation of this relationship between someone’s appearance and their social class in America now is the clothes that people wear, and not just how they look but what brand they are which implies how much they cost. Maybe (I say that because I am young, only know about pre-1995 fashion from media, and haven’t talked with anyone older about this) t-shirts used to have been “working class” attire whereas button down collared shirts would be “middle class or upper class attire. Now those lines seem blurred in the modern day but the brand of clothing has a bigger value to the wearer and the observer.
@@lbrown8167 up until the late Golden Age in America (early 20th century, equal to the British Edwardian era I mentioned), fashions, social norms and beauty standards still aligned heavily with those within Europe and the UK - for the one we discuss here that is to be pale/bright skinned. You are correct in noting the absence of notable painted portraits of American nobility of this time. While America most certainly was carving out its own standards and beginning to define its own ‘American’ look of beauty, this absence of portraiture is not really due to that factor, but rather the increase in mass photography. It was by then the fashion to have ones photograph taken upon important occasions, lessening the extent to which one could be depicted with that extremely pale skin you mentioned seen in earlier centuries’ European portraiture. Also simply, photographs where in black and white, so the ‘brightness’ of one’s skin would inevitably be dulled even if they managed to have skin top KPop idols would envy today. I guess the main takeaway here is that even though we discuss the pale/bright skin of generations past, they too likely struggled meet their own beauty standards just as we do today. Things would be much easier if we could naturally love the skin we’re in.
Additionally, America had fought hard for independence, it is no surprise that post 18th century monarchy-style portraits of Americans are uncommon as those portraits represent everything a whole war waged over. Again, many pre Independence portraits are in this style and do depict very pale skin as was the accepted beauty standard for the class of people who are getting a portrait done.
The overarching point here, is that you are correct in your point that this beauty standard is less obvious at the end of the Golden Age in America - I would only counter that the visibility of the beauty standard, for modern viewers attempting to look back at evidence, is what changed and not the standard itself. For the rest of your comment I completely agree! Wealth is most definitely shown through materialism in the modern world and people with pretty clothes, shiny jewellery and fancy cars are viewed as enviable/desirable. The effect to which this has changed the beauty standard towards skin colour though, I would say is lacking. It most definitely changed standards of wealth, just not the one I referred to in my original comment to do with skin colour. Thank You for your comment though! It’s really cool to be able to discuss
EDIT; I should note this is a white-centric feature of upper class society within both European and American culture during this time period. There is a wealth more discussion to be had on how beauty standards for light skin affected black/indigenous/latino and many other cultures existing alongside these beauty standards in such strict and of course, racist, societies. I do not wish to seem to be discounting this, merely following on from the discussion within the original lecture pertaining to multiple cultures preferring the lighter shades of their skin tones. I wished to point out that Caucasians too preferred the lightest version of their skin tone for the vast amount of our history as white people liking to be tanned is of course addressed as an anomaly in the lecture
I'd say that it makes the perfect argument to "end racism" as much as that could ever be possible. Race will always play some part. Just like gender, sexual orientation, fill in the blank will play SOME role in opinions and decisions. But the over arching biggest factor, across cultures, across the globe, will always be class. The haves vs the have nots. People always want to be the better class because They all want their children to have a better life than they did. That's the thing that is equal across every single human being. And the most noticeable thing that means they had a better life, was lighter skin. Because you can't have lighter skin AND have a job with intense labor, in the sun, day after day. So it boils down to every parent's desire, for their children to be better off than they were. To end as much suffering as possible in any way. But suffering also makes character. So it's a balance that will always be wrong on one side or the other. A spoiled rich kid will never be as strong as someone who rose up from the gutter. But no parent ever wants their kid to have to ever experience what the gutter looks like. It's messy. Like all of humanity is.
@Emma Dow
You are somewhat right in general, but misunderstand the origins. White people preferring tanned skin did not happen as a result of a change from industrialization to corporate work 100 years ago, it was a direct result of the industrial revolution 260 years ago.
Up until that point, most poor people were farmers working in the sun. A result of the industrial revolution was the opening of factories. So poor people came in from the fields and started working inside factories, resulting in their skin becoming paler. It also created a new class of wealthy people, so there were a lot more rich people with disposable incomes. People started becoming tanned because of their leisure activities, travelling and going on holidays in the sun etc... Thus tanned became a desirable trait. Poor = pale white & Tanned = Wealthy.
Asia hasn't moved past the Farmer = Poor = Dark skin stereotype yet, but it is changing.
The Orientals prized pale skin before they met whites. Explain THAT.
I am extremely impressed with this man’s ability to navigate contentious issues with humor and intelligence. I am 65 years old man and have been struggling with issues of race, culture, social issues and whatever since I was a teenager and have some fairly strong opinions about certain issues and others that I am still completely baffled about. I would love to be able to communicate with this man because there are certain things that I think are kind of bizarre in the responses of the people commenting or even some of the students. One of the ones is the issue with white skin in Asia. People keep saying it’s because they want to look like little babies. At least in Southeast Asia where I have lived for over two years on and off and have many Thai and Laotian friends, white skin is highly valued. The movie stars and the television actors are almost exclusively 50-50 which means that they are half white and half Thai and they have white skin and more western features. That is not about looking like a baby. This IMHO is a universal prejudice about lighter skin. As many people mentioned, dark skin is associated with farm work or outdoor toil and light skin is associate with affluence, indoor work, professional work, etc.
I’m trying to find the name of this professor who I give major kudos for for taking on difficult topics with such elan, but I seem to be struggling to find the institution that he is associated with it or his name. It looks like his classes are quite popular and I’m not the least bit surprised. I’m also not surprised at the inherent limited views on some of these issues by the students because it seems like they’ve been indoctrinated since a very young age with these notions of white supremacy, systemic racism etc. I do think I have something to add to the conversation. I went to an inner-city school, I have many inner city friends and I talk about stuff with people all over the world. I’ve traveled extensively throughout the world and I like to engage with people. Not just the people in the hotels or taxi drivers I like to talk to people who are working on the street or that I meet on buses and trains and granted since I don’t generally speak the language I’m getting the views of people who are maybe better educated because they do speak some English but a lot of these people i communicate with on very limited terms because I do understand some of the words in the language and they understand nonverbal communication and maybe the occasional words in English.
I think conversations surrounding race, social and cultural issues in the knighted states are so messed up and while he said they are complicated wish to sub since they are on another since they are very simple. People are very predictable and I think it is so important to understand that we need to hear what people are saying but we also need to look at Situations from an understanding of human nature and also from the general experience of living in a fairly open democratic society which is the most racially, culturally, socially and perhaps politically diverse country in the history of the world. That means we are going to have diversion opinions and some fairly strongly held antipathies towards those that don’t look or think like us. But these things are predictable and I think in many ways very understandable. I do think it’s important that we don’t get too wrapped up in these supposed to complexity of any of these issues because that just makes all of us victims of uncertainty and other issues surrounding differences in class, economic status, race, religion And political views. I’m a big fan of people like Thomas Sowell, Douglas Murray, Candace Owen, Andrew Doyle, James Lindsay and other western speakers that try to speak intelligently from a place of knowledge and research instead of focusing on feelings or emotions rather than what is actually going on in and what has happened throughout history, including history of the past 60+ years or so which is very well documented.
You've just gotta have an earring, and use the word "bro", and the kids will accept you.
This dude is enormously simplistic in his approach. Somehow in all of his experiments, Africans and African Americans are almost always shown to be at the bottom of the racial barrel . Yet, African Americans have an outsized positive influence on the world.
You must have liked it when Candace Owen made a statement about Hitler making everything in his country good, if you don't believe me just look it up on TH-cam! But since you like Candace Owen I know you approve of such talk!
He's at Penn State.
@@DarlingDaintyfoot what does that mean?
Admiration for this. Great teacher because of his humility. Thank you! 🙏❤
The answer is so simple yet alludes so many. Living in a province you work outside and your skin gets darker. Living in the city and being able to work indoors managing a business or having the finances to have others work for you means you're more prosperous.
It's that simple. In addition, when Europeans showed up with their technology for trade they didn't dispel this image.
I watched a conversation with Filipina's about the type of women American men want. The things they prioritize, one of them being skin color, put those women in the reject class in their culture.
This is why I tell people when discussing slavery in America that a group of elites saw an opportunity to take advantage of a commonly held understanding of lighter skin meaning more prosperous to create laws that benefitted them. You know what political cartoons you never see anymore are? Those that made fun of Irishmen and Asians. Africans weren't the only ones to be taken advantage of. In addition, let's not even get started on the slave trade that existed in Africa before any Europeans showed up to capitalize on it when looking for additional labor options since they didn't have enough prisoners to do the labor they needed.
You should be proud of how quickly Americans started fighting against slavery following the Revolution. Slavery was common place worldwide at the time.
Anyway.....this ain't my middle school social studies class so I'll get off my little soap box.
Legislation regarding skin color = bad. Preference for skin colors = neutral. Preference for lighter skinned versions of your own ethnicity = Potential Prosperity.
BLACKS ARE NOT TALKING ABOUT SLAVERY AROUND THE WORLD
BLACKS ARE TALKING ABOUT THE DEMONIC BEHAVIOR RIGHT HERE IN THE UNITED STATES 🇺🇸
SMH
Skip to around 30:00 where he’s explaining that you can be totally uneducated about these topics, and strongly opinionated.
If it’s “as simple as that”, why do trends change over time, back and forth, etc.? Why do different cultures value light skin, others value tans, others value dark skin?
Because you can’t explain all social phenomena by making random guesses about evolutionary biology.
Lastly, regarding slavery:
Were Hitler’s soldiers justified in their deeds because that was the way of doing things at the time in Nazi Germany?
No? Then how is chattel slavery historically justified by it being commonplace? There were abolitionists at the founding of the US. People knew it was wrong.
It seems to me your opinions are based off of total ignorance of the cultures you’re discussing, cherry-picked historical facts, and a sort of guessing-game evolutionary biology.
I wouldn’t be confident standing on such a rickety foundation if I were you.
@@charliekowittmusic I started to go into great depth to respond to your questions since ethnic studies and history is literally my field of expertise. However, the TH-cam comment section is probably not the place to go into this. What I will say is:
History is messy and rarely as cut and dry as we want it to be. The relatively small and growing contingent of Abolitionists in the 18th Century is the very reason why we moved away from slavery and indentured servitude at all. The subject is so complex. I mean, all white men didn't even get the right to vote in the US until 1856 for crying out loud. Land ownership, tax laws, and a few other laws were used to disenfranchise even white men from voting for 60 years. Interesting enough, the election of Lincoln a few years later was a major catalyst to the Civil War. Anyway, the point is that you're right in that much of what happened around the subject of slavery was morally wrong. For millenia, the concept of slavery wasn't really considered morally wrong. The question of morality was in how you treated your slaves, and in all honesty, the majority of slave owners didn't treat their slaves poorly if not solely based on the grounds that every capable slave was equivalent in cost to owning a home. On that note, only about 1.4% of the US population at the height of slavery actually owned a slave. Like today, with the power of tech billionaires, it was a select few in power that dominated the cultural mindset at the time. Acceptance of slavery was a practice as far back as human records go and many of those in power wanted to see the practice continued. Re-shaping such an ingrained mindset took time and sacrifice. We can't even really comprehend what it was like to live under that mindset today because the Abolitionist movement was ultimately successful.
This is a great conversation. I love what the boy on the right said about what people think of Americans when in his country. Black people & White people are viewed the same in other countries, we’re all viewed as Americans. I wish that’s what we could go back to here in America. I hate the way the country has become.
In the Western countries, there used to be a preference for white skin also ( until 1940's?). That is why ladies used parasols and stayed out of the sun. Darker skin was for working class people, not so different from other cultures around the world. It changed when people had money to go on holidays (to warmer climates?). Holidays were for the wealthy only, so if you had tanned skin, you had money and time to spend ( abroad?) a way of showing your wealth.
It actually goes further back than that people started tanning in the 1920s when Coco Chanel came back from Europe with a tan tan and became popular in the 1920s because it meant that you could afford to go outside of the country. Pale skin was very popular during the Victorian era.
A “preference for whiter skin” seems odd to me, because when I was growing up in the 80’s, people were teased for having very light skin, and you might be called a “ghost”. We were expected to tan in the summer and later in, tanning salons became popular. I think dermatologists tried to popularize whiter skin because they didn’t want people tanning themselves into skin cancer. I didn’t hear anyone really preferring lighter skin until I moved to a more diverse community and had some helpful black friends who taught me more about the culture they grew up in, where someone might have light skin that was preferred over darker skin, or “good hair” which was less curly. It was a foreign concept to me. I told my friends how in my community people desired to have curly hair and darker skin. We concluded that people always want what they don’t have, and the real work is to learn to love what God gave you.
Do Albinos in Tanzania get white privilege also
As a Korean I would like to say this. The "white" skin the Korean people talk about indicates the white, milky, bright, and pure and clean skin of like their babies, not the white people's white skin. Remember that most of the Korean young men (of course not every man) like baby faced girls with baby skin-like skin, and you will easily find many examples of idol girls in the Kpop insdustry. This is what foreign people usually misunderstand about it. Actually the Korean girl in that video, Lea's skin can probably be an example of the 'white' skin the Korean people prefer.
i second this. I grew up in South East Asia and lots of people see white skin as beauty standard, but it's always the soft and white skin of newborn babies. there's nothing to do with the skin from white people, at least from my experience.
on the other hand, they see darker skin people as poor, low education. even in the past they call darker skin people as "savages".
there are of course some levels of discrimination there. but this stems from the history of wealthy vs hard labor, and has nothing to do with the skin of white people or African descendants as many Americans think. In history, the wealthy stayed inside most of the time, they didn't do hard labor which exposed them to bright sunlight (remember that Asian skin is much more sensitive to sunlight)
@@mryantong yeah it makes sense because lighter skin is a neotenous feature, and neoteny is a part of femininity which is seen as pretty and beautiful. and more neotenous males are often more intelligent slower and more developed
@@tayzk5929 in Southeast Asia, the more lighter the women is, the feminine she will be, on the other hand the tanner the male is the masculine he will bd
@@mmm-kd3mummm Slow and fast life strategies
So having the physics major made me think of this point. We want to focus on one thing, but it is always a mix of multiple variables. And explaining multiple variables is so hard to do in a concrete way like mathematics, that it took Newton literally inventing calculus to describe gravity from two sources determining how something moves through space. So to try and reduce a complex problem to something so simple, as "it's ALL racism" or its "ALL personal responsibility" is impossible until the equivalent of a Newton literally invents a new way of speaking in a sense. And people want everything to be black or white, 2+2=4. And that wouldn't be possible to explain the complexities of these issues, like Newton trying to explain the complexities of multi planetary movement.
That is a very interesting observation. Thank you for sharing that.
I wonder if in the US and Europe, the reason tanning is popular now is that only people who have time to tan are those who do not have full-time office jobs. In the past, women in the US wore hats and gloves so they wouldn't tan. In the past, not having to work outdoors was status thing.
So glad we didn’t miss a minute of everybody sitting down . Have you folks ever heard of editing?
This class makes the best case for having diversity on a college campus. Very cool to have so many different ethnic groups to learn from, perfect for sociology, of course wouldnt matter as much if any for math and science.
I like this guy, he jumps around a lot but his passion dwarfs anything else.
I find the jumping around irritating
I am in your class now professor. Thank you.
In many cultures lighter skin signifies wealth. Just like being fat used to signify health. Only wealthy people could afford to not be outside getting tanned by the sun. Just like they were the only ones who could afford to be fat. So both traits were considered positive or attractive.
Do Albinos in Tanzania get white privilege also
the idea continued largely to modern day due to colonization. Thats also what influenced ideas of skin whitening as well as more european features being preferred
I appreciate these discussions
Actual lecture starts at 24:30.
54:45 You should've talked about the preinstalled face filters that come with phones nowadays. In east-asia it makes the face brighter and the facial features more child-like. In America and Europe it's trying to give you some version of a Kardashian-look.
Would be awesome to ask the participants what face filters they use (if they use any)
Why don’t the students know about the social status. Peasants were dark as they worked in the fields. The rich and “beautiful” didn’t work outside hence a lighter colour.
The more I listened the more amazed how being told something influences you so much that you don’t know why you think this.
Why is everyone saying the exact same thing the prof said an acting like it's their own original contribution?
This seems to ignore genetics, no?
I was thinking the same thing. However, I feel it has been so engrained into our brains, that fair skin is beautiful, so much that some of these students don't even know how it came to be the social beauty standard.
Not only did she not swear she used the super formal asking if there was a Korean there.
To have white skin meant that the person doesnt have to work out in the sun , in the past people used to call aristocrats blue blood , because their veins were visible under their very pale skin . The darker the persons skin was the lower his position in the society was - It was obvious that he is forced to spend time out working .
Do Albinos in Tanzania get white privilege also
Amazing professor!
Tell me about the four stages of homelessness. I can't but I can give you my opinion on it. 🤯 And that is exactly where we are as a society.
So does today's "racism" standard actually stem from Product Advertising? White people tan, spray tan, buy products to darken themselves. In other countries they ae encouraged to lighten...🤔
The difference is that the student knew he was not knowledgeable on the subject and could only offer an opinion. However, most people give their opinion thinking they are knowledgeable on the subject.
back to the old days, in china darker skin means poor， you have to work outdoor under the sun, thats what behind it.
@William Tell what do you mean??
The whitening product in Korea is not a white product. If there's a product like that,
There will be no one to worry about because of the skin color.
There is no such product in the world.
There may be such a misunderstanding because of the product name.
The purpose of whitening products is to make your skin bright and clean.
As you can see, it doesn't make it white.
Bright and clean means...
It's not white or dark.
It means that it gives a glow by making your skin beautiful and good.
"Your skin is white!"It's dark~! I've never heard of it in my life while living in Korea.
" Your skin is so good!"
"I got something on my skin because I'm tired~!"
I talk about my skin condition a lot.
As I said above, good skin is a condition where the skin texture is beautiful and soft, glowing and clean.
Whether your skin is white or dark is not particularly important.
I'll see if my skin is in bad condition.
Many people envy people with good skin conditions and say they are openly envious.
Yeah ive noticed that too . Over there its not about whiteness but about perfect flawless skin lol sam richards is being dishonest once again and ridiculous but to be fair its not his fault media news and so on potrays it as skin whitening ive noticed from western news. Smh this is why i dont get news from the west as they domt know anything about anything especially about foreign places. I refuse to see news from those places.
When I visited Korea one thing I noticed was how people seemed to have paler faces and darker necks. Basically they use foundations that are lighter than they actually are. That suggests that they want 'whiter' skin. Also KPop celebrities before and afters in terms of appearance before they go lt famous show cosmetic procedures where skin lightening is a must for a 'glow up'.
@@ifeifesi It is often seen in 20-year-olds or high school students who have just started putting on makeup. you haven't been to korea lol Koreans prefer natural and light makeup
Ŵhat school is this from? What is his curriculum he teaches in? His points are spot on, and his examples are great.
This guy is like a soft play bulldozer, he doesn’t let anything or anyone stop him but he laughs it off without losing their respect 👍
that's true!
I love how that kid said something about the white centering in medicine lol and the professor destroys him. This is the problem with intellectuals, they think they know but the don't know sh*t lol and the professor God bless him acknowledged this and I hope these kids heard what he was saying
It's not the "things" that make racism, but the persons that perpetuate these occurrences.
Which aspect of the person? Their beliefs? The ego? Their actions? Break it down
@@nicholasdu4 obviously, ones person is an accumulation of of those questions you asked. You answered your own questions.
In the US and Europe, having light skin was traditionally considered “Fashionable” or desirable, much like in Asia. My grand mother (or European descent) would powder her face to look more fair skinned, because when she was young, that was the thing.
It was because (like in Asia) most “common” people worked in the fields and had a tan. And wealthy people did not have to work in the Sun. Women would wear hats and head scarves and even veils (look at pictures of Jackie Kennedy) to avoid the son.
Once we industrialize more and most jobs were indoors, the working class were not exposed to the sun as much, but wealthy people had leisure time to be out doors. So looking tan became much more fashionable.
Thank God for Coco Chanel. She went and got a tan in Europe, and everybody started following that.
omg this is what i have been wanting americans to talk about!finally. american dont seem to understand the way the rest of the world views race. and it shows
I never thought I'd ever see a sociology class where students are taught to think critically and question their beliefs.
So thankful to the algorithm 'gods' for suggesting this vid. Commenting so it gets wider viewership. Not a 37:40 tunnel vision viewership 😉
Coolest professor EVER.
The correct answer would be that every homeless person has their own unique set of circumstances, and policies that target groups won't be effective.
This teacher has the hippie sound in his voice. The real hippies. Like the Woodstock hippies. Lol
He is a hippie
She sounds like she is singing when she talks her language 😍
I'm 60 years old. When I was a teen I was Punk Rock. I chose not to go to college so I wouldn't get brainwashed further. A lifetime of odd jobs allowed free time for surfing and chasing girls. If I knew there were teachers and classes like this I would have gone to school. Fortunately I read a lot of nonfiction. I quit reading when I got an iPhone a few years ago. I'm glad I can watch these classes now.
I'm using my phone to have access to these lectures without needing to go to school. Non-fiction and fiction are both valuable, knowledge can be extracted from everything. I also recommend the thousands of audiobooks on TH-cam, never stop learning!
It seems to me that the ideal look in parts of Asia could be described as "the porcelaine doll girls" (?) Maybe their image of beauty was inspired by the porcelaine figures they produced as well as paleness as a sign of wealth?
I'm Korean (adopted) and my wife is Korean. Light skin means you're not a laborer ie. A farmer or construction worker aka not poor
he is not as loud and as strict as Jordan Peterson...but i think he is doing the most wonderful work, Getting students to think critically and thats a tough job.
It was a different time, but my instructors/professors didn’t allow lateness, ball caps, hoods up or slumping down in our chairs… and it was an extremely liberal private art college.
Lighter skin in Asia suggests wealth (not peasant), education employment status (office). England, (60s 70s) tanned skin suggested wealth, worldliness, (travel was expensive).
Less than 100 years ago, Europeans and Americans also valued pale skin because they were also agricultural societies. It’s even in the name. “Fair” means both beautiful and white. This was true long before other races were integrated into the society.
We in Germany were actually lied to by US-imposed politicians after the war: "There are some guest-workers coming, but they will go home again."
Now every year there are more schools where there is Not a single german student anymore.
It's Anti-White Policy.
Reality exists independently of your perception of it.
I find this so ironic about South Asia. The two most beautiful women I have ever personally known were both very dark complected women from Pakistan. And no, I wasn't the only one who noticed.
That’s called personal preference. This lecture example was not about personal preferences at all, and in fact, the professor was trying to get them to go more deeply into that point…. That it wasn’t about the most beautiful girl YOU have seen. It’s about the general public and their overarching beauty standards.
Until recently, fair skin has always been a sign wealth. Working class agrarian people had to work outside so they would get tan. Later this idea was reinforced by colonialism.
Preference for white skin is not enforced by colonialism. White skin looks beautiful -- looks youthful, smooth, bright, glowing. With dark skin you cant easily see this. Thats the number 1 reason why most of the world like in Asia have preference of white skin.
It's difficult to talk about this issue as a white person. It feels like a lot of people are out to find one wrong thing you say and then blast you for it.
being late on the first day could be excused....but only the first day
I think only showing the reasons for the desire of lighter skin in Asian people leaves out the universality of that desire. In Europe a lighter skin was also a sign of nobility, or rather not needing to work outside in the sunlight.
Good point, but that might have distracted students from the prof's real point. He wants to emphasize that this has nothing to do with Europe.
This class was brutal. So late to start. I could not watch it after waiting nearly 10 minutes for the class to begin.
Maybe that's why you got zero out of it. Patience is a virtue
I think not knowing Leahs name is an example of "toxic masculinity" 😂😂😂😂
When you talk about Korean men, I think you mean skincare. Skincare. Not so much make up. Korean skincare really is wonderful. There are often brightening properties, but it’s not about looking “white”. It’s really not about race. It’s about looking healthy; with skin that’s clear, transparent, celestial, blemish free, glowing, angelic, milky, glassy, baby skin. Not European. Not pink.
Personally, I judge beauty by facial features and physique.
I grew up in Calif. I always wished I was black or Hispanic. Because then I would have had a sweet, high paying, gov job!
if this were Georgia State or Georgia Tech, there would be a good proportion of Koreans in there for volunteers!
Racism is the dislike of a person or group simply based on the appearance of their skin tone. I can dislike Asian or Black people based on my previous experiences with people of that appearance. Those are two totally different life experience situations. As long as that experience is not too minimal, As in five occurrences or a hundred. If I have had twenty years of bad experiences, I’m not racist for that dislike because of extended experiences…as long as I reevaluate each time I move to different cities or regions. In the ideal situation, I would reevaluate every individual person. However, that can be counterproductive. If I spend to much time evaluating one individual person, I loose time to evaluate the next.
The interesting thing with me is that my three most significant relationships were with women of three different races.
That's why STEREOTYPES came into being - REDUCE the mental effort to discern the variability in the different populations.
My wife Karen used to say, “Just think, eventually everyone will be a beautiful light brown!”
I'm a fan of Lea anyway. She is cute.
Her laugh is adorable.
It's interesting because I do hear people talking about 'colorism' as just another variable in the intersectionality concept.
46:40 , in my country New Zealand, there's generally a preference for darker skin. It's the pale skinned people who are likely to be passed over e.g. in the dating pool. It's not 'cool' here to be pale.
This has resulted in a lot of pale skinned people paying a lot of money to 'beautify' their skin with e.g. cosmetics/makeup & spray tans.
Pale skinned people often are asked if they are ok, as in healthy, and dark skinned people presumed to be healthier.
Here, pale skinned = sickly, weak, insipid, unreliable, lower down in the societal pecking order. Dark skinned = robustly healthy & strong, reliable, higher up in the social pecking order.
That's very interesting. I never knew that about New Zealand.
I live in NZ and that's 100% not true lol.
Everybody froths for the "pakehas" and some are down right envious of them.
So what about me? Latino 😂
Man I wish I could trademark the word LIKE... I'd be the richest man ever in 20 minutes! Lol
I've heard two explanations on why lighter skin is considered more attractive or desirable in east asian countries, either, neither, or both could be true or false, plus other factors:
1: darker skin is associated with working outside in the fields (more sun) so lighter skinned people work inside and would have a correlation with being wealthier or more intelligent.
2: all the powers that invaded and took power over the centuries were lighter skinned people, so lighter skin was associated with being more powerful/wealthy from that as well
@@user-jzk I'm open to alternative explanations if you have some
White skin looks beautiful -- looks youthful, smooth, bright. With dark skin you cant easily see this. Thats the number 1 reason why most of the world like in Asia have preference of white skin.
내 얼굴이 하얀 이유는 썬크림을 바르기 때문이고 햇빛으로부터 피부를 보호해서 오랫동안 좋은피부와 젊음을 유지하고 싶기 때문입니다.몸은 태닝해도 상관 없지만 절대 얼굴은 안합니다.그리고 한국은 여름에 태닝해도 반년후 겨울이 지나면 다시 하얀피부로 돌아옵니다...특히 저는 햇빛에 태닝하지 않고 태닝샵에서 합니다.햇빛에 태닝하면 피부노화가 빨리 진행되기 때문입니다.평소에는 반드시 선크림을 바르고 다닙니다.뭐 대충 한국인의 한명으로써의 생각과 행동입니다 ㅋㅋㅋ
Its obvious this professor is a card carrying liberal but he is very respectful of other opinions and life experience. He is very thought provoking and shows the errors in the thought process of modern day liberalism and the progressive thought process if you can refer to it as an actual process
It might be interesting to know that fair skin was also prized amongst certain white cultures long before their exposure to darker skinned people. So even white people wanted to be whiter. I also think this may have been due to class and sun exposure. The new tan phenomenon is an american invention in my opinion and has since become popular in certain other western countries.
so down for Lea
"like, like, this is like ... and stuff."
That's exactly how it is in Germany with Americans. When we meet an American, the characteristic is: American. Skin color doesn't matter, we don't differentiate between black, white, native, latin american.
Because the difference is solely IQ. Which is lower than average
@@krotchlickmeugh627 What do you think ? Do you think skin color determines IQ? You are wrong!
“You can be light and poor. You can be dark and rich. But you can’t be dark and poor.” Slum Dog Millionaire
You need to have a class on ethnicity and race i was taught there were only five races just a lot of different ethnicities these kids don't seem to understand that
It is more about upper class and working class.
This is about class not race. The elite didn't expose themselves to the elements so they had lighter skin....even European elites powdered their faces to adhere to this.
I am so sorry for their future children
From an evolutionary point of view, darker skinned people are able to enjoy the outdoors in the sunshine for longer than severely melanin challenged light skinned people.
That's an evolutionary advantage for dark skinned people.
Sadly, fashion and classism
( see for example 27:20 where northwest Europeans are historically featured in illustrations in journals & guidance manuals )
has made paler skin fashionable, even if naturally paled skinned people have the constant inconvenience of having to always to slather their skin with sunblock, wear broad brimmed hats, and even avoid the sun altogether -
- this is all very limiting on a pale skinned person's freedom to have to always worry about getting sunburnt with the accompanying risk of deadly skin cancer.
Whereas a dark skinned person can readily head out into the sunny outdoors & not need to bother with planning ahead to have loads of sunblock cream, long sleeved shirt, and broad brimmed hat.
Pale skinned people would suffer if they had an outdoors job - they are limited to only mostly _in_ doors work.
It makes no sense to me that racism exists that is prejudiced against _darker_ skin, when surely being _light_ skinned is inferior, from an evolutionary point of view.
Fair skin is more advantageous for drawing nourishment from the sun, which helped humans survive in northern winters. Then when the sun is too much, they get a tan. In tropical environments there is always too much sun, so skin didn't evolve to get lighter. If you only understand half of this argument, you would either expect all humans to be black, or conclude that humans originated in Sweden and evolved as they moved towards the tropics.
World = Macrocosmos racism
American = Microcosmos racism
Eminem's first line in "My Band": "Don't tell 'em I'm tanning!".
나는 자외선 차단제를 항상 바릅니다. 그 이유는 햇빛으로부터 피부를 보호하고 노화를 방지하기 위해서 입니다.태닝은 태닝샵에서 합니다.해수욕장에서는 옷을 입고 수영을합니다.자외선 차단제를 바르지 않은 사람과 30년후 얼굴을 비교하면 당신이 어떤 피부색을 가지고 태어났는지와 상관없이 자외선 차단제를 바르고 싶어질겁니다.😂
What is this class?
Answer to question is never. I dont look at amything anymore through the prism of race. I look at what people do or say as either right or wrong good or evil.
Interesting that even anti-western views can be euro-centric. 'We pushed our beauty standard on them." Uh, no you didn't, we developed it on our own.
I have to ask what his mission is? His real mission.
Even if you go back to the Victorian era in England, women used beauty products with arsenic to attempt to get the palest skin possible.
Yes some times things are a problem of many things and usually invens by people hatred towards others. Who don't look like them
racism doesn't exist❤
I wish the Professor would learn how to ask direct questions. His constant hmmm, humph, bro, dude...all get in the way and sounds foolish.
I think it's for the intended purpose of making the students feel comfortable being in front of so many people and saying things that might sound dumb to some people..
Pale/light skin definitely stemmed from the "Class system" Royalty/Aristocracy/Upper Class never worked a day's graft outside therefore had skin almost as see through as the most "Brassy ginger" person you've ever seen *the ones that have green freckles and smell like sugarpuffs*
Middle class almost as milky white being mostly banker wankers/lawyers/Doctors and office 9-5 day's
Working Class the skin sun-kissed, what you see is what you get, not backwards at coming forward, THICK skinned. (My favourite kind)
Lower and poor...
Obviously no need to explain.
We all know why such a Class exists, especially the first one I mentioned.
I can see that a Korean student is very calm and confident about her insight. By the way, Westerners are not white men or white skinned persons rather than red. Ancient Korean are looked perfectly.
The skin you wear has nothing to do with the soul you keep.
Racism discussion starts at 45 minutes in 🤷🏼♂️… yikes !