Social Stratification Based On Race In Modern America
It goes without saying that the racial stratification experienced by Black Americans today is largely a result of their history in America. The racial stratification we see today can be explained by the centuries of racism and individual and institutional discrimination in America. With much of these actions being based on our socially constructed ideas of race and what race we perceive people to be, we tend to examine race by comparing the lives and experiences of people of different races. In contrast, if we go back to a time in American history when hypodescent, colloquially known as the “one-drop rule,” was prevalent as a means of separating Blacks from Whites, we can begin to question and understand the stratification that occurs within a race. Dr. Victor Ray acknowledges this importance in “One-Drop To Rule Them All,” when he states that if we only focus on issues between races, details about racism within minority communities is concealed. Colorism is social stratification based on skin tone that occurs both intra-racially and interracially, however, this paper will discuss colorism as an intraracial issue. It also occurs internationally, but colorism in America will be the focus of this paper. Colorism is caused by wages of lightness, reinforced through symbolic violence, and can be redressed through education.
By revisiting the one-drop rule, we can begin to understand what wages of lightness refer to and where it comes from. In “Why Barack Obama Is Black: A Cognitive Account of Hypodescent,” Halberstadt, Sherman, S., and Sherman, J. observe that the historical concept of hypodescent, which refers to placing a person with even an “arbitrarily small proportion of minority blood,” into the socially subordinate group, was a method of defining who was considered a slave. It has evolved to being used for socio-political purposes in today’s society. Our racial categorization in contemporary society is defined by symbolic interactionism and our racialization. Symbolic interactionism, a term coined by Herbert Blumer refers to how we use words and symbols to understand the world around us. Through the process of racialization, we construct meanings of race and use that to decide who we can interact with and how we should interact with them, which makes the existence of minority traits salient information. We tend to define people with minority traits as the minority race we observe them to be, even if they are racially ambiguous. This brings the one-drop rule full circle as even if someone isn’t clearly Black or White, for example, according to Halberstadt, Sherman, S., and Sherman, J., the existence of stereotypical minority characteristics lead us to classify them as black anyway. This concept of hypodescent and how hypersensitive it has made us to racial characteristics has lead to the development of wages of lightness. Wages of lightness refers to stratification that occurs primarily based on skin complexion but includes other characteristics as well such as hair texture or eye color. To put it succinctly, it is based on a person’s proximity to typical white characteristics. However, the most significant part of this concept is that in society, the closer one is to stereotypically White features as defined by the bounds of their own race, the higher their ranking in the social hierarchy. Historically, lighter skin for a black person could mean working in the house on a plantation versus working the field. Wages of lightness continue to put some people at a social advantage in today’s society. For instance, research has shown having lighter skin as a Black woman makes you more attractive. Not only that but, wages of lightness can also provide social capital for Black women because light-skinned Black women have a higher chance of being married and greater “access to higher status spouses”. Perhaps more compelling, is the impact wages of lightness have on economic outcomes. One might assume wages of lightness refers to literal work wages in respect to skin complexion and while that isn’t what the phrase is referring to, it does seem to have a double meaning as wages are incredibly impacted by one’s complexion. In fact, the intra-racial wage disparities in which earnings fall as skin color darkens are just as substantial as the wage differences interracially between Whites and Blacks. It should be noted that in the United States, race tends to be a bipolar construct, separating the White from non-White, and so, while there are socioeconomic benefits to having closer proximity to stereotypical White characteristics, there is still a disparity between the more phenotypically White Black person and a White person. Colorism is a byproduct of wages of lightness. The perception that the closer a person is to appearing white without being white, the higher they are in the social hierarchy, aids in perpetuating the concept of colorism. The only difference between colorism and wages of lightness is that the former stratifies people intra-racially based on skin color and the latter is based on a several other factors.
One has to wonder, if minorities have fought so hard for things like equal pay and equal opportunities, how can these marginalized groups allow such stratification to occur within their own group? It occurs because of symbolic violence. Symbolic violence is a term used to describe when minorities unconsciously accept, engage in, and reinforce their own oppression. In the case of colorism and how it is perpetuated, there is one specific form of symbolic violence used and that is when people of color internalize White beauty norms. This form of symbolic violence manifests itself in many ways but the most pervasive is skin bleaching. Skin-whitening products have become a billion-dollar industry and skin bleaching is occurring on a global scale. The highly dangerous act is all in an attempt for people of color to Anglicize their features. Dr. Margaret Hunter further proves the point that skin tone is a form of capital when she explains, the combination of old beliefs and modern invention now allow people to purchase racial capital both in the form of skin bleaching and more commonly than skin bleaching in America, cosmetic surgery. Dr. Hunter defines racial capital as something separate from one’s racial identity as it is more so about how others perceive you than how you identify yourself and because of this, racial capital can only thrive in a society where certain features (generally lighter skin and stereotypical White characteristics) are appreciated more than others (minority characteristics). Whether it is by purchasing an “Anglo nose,” or lighter skin, when minorities alter themselves in order to appear more stereotypically White, they are buying into the idea that White beauty norms are the standard, and inherently reinforcing their own oppression in doing so. Symbolic violence reinforces colorism because these actions of skin bleaching or cosmetic surgery can only get a person so close to whiteness. America has a history of drawing the lines between who is and who isn’t White which can of course be seen in the one-drop rule, and so while a person may choose to identify as White, they can’t control what race society perceives them to be and chances are, it won’t be White. It is because of this, symbolic violence perpetuates colorism as it mainly brings racial capital intra-racially. Being closer in proximity to White characteristics may move a person up the social hierarchy within their own race, however, the disparity will still exist between them and their White counterparts. Despite how pervasive skin bleaching has become, public discourse remains “fraught with tension”, about this form of symbolic violence and how it maintains a colorist ideology and perpetuates the racial caste system established centuries ago.
When taking into consideration the prevalence of skin bleaching and cosmetic surgery, and the vast disparities people of the same race face based on their skin colors, one must carefully examine society’s knowledge of these occurrences. Are people who bleach their skin and chemically relax their hair conscious of these decisions and their impact, and are simply playing the game? Or, are they truly engaging in a form of symbolic violence by unknowingly supporting their own oppression? The best way to address the colorism issue is by making society more knowledgeable on colorism and its impact. Tennille McCray agrees that knowledge is an important factor in remedying this problem by pointing out the lack of public knowledge about colorism which allows its effects to proliferate. There can also be policy changes made to help solve the issue of colorism such as giving it protection under Title VII. McCray even suggests having psychologists review colorism’s impact on plaintiffs and defendants in court. This suggestion is quite important as colorism impacts legal proceedings as well. For instance, research has shown that when a Black male is more stereotypically Black, he has over double the chance of being sentenced to death than his less stereotypically Black counterpart for the same crime. However, if the public isn’t informed on these disparities, policy changes won’t be made. People simply won’t know enough that they would care enough to fight for a policy like giving colorism protection and attention under Title VII. It is, for this reason, I feel the best way to remedy the problem is through educating the public. The key to symbolic violence is the unconscious reification of one’s own oppression. If minorities were aware of the impact their skin bleaching or cosmetic surgeries have, they may be more resistant to this internalization of White beauty norms and begin breaking down the systemic perpetuation of colorism, which is symbolic violence.
Colorism in America is yet another dangerous reminder of our country’s past and a reiteration of the racial caste system established years ago. A branch of the wages of lightness, colorism is perpetuated in society unconsciously by the people it marginalizes, and thus with education and knowledge, we can begin to remedy the problem. We know that colorism impacts how attractive a person is perceived to be, their socioeconomic status, and even how harshly they may be punished for a crime and so companies and surgeons sell minorities racial capital by giving them the tools they need to climb the social hierarchy. Not only are people profiting off of minorities oppression, but minorities are unknowingly buying into it. We must educate ourselves and each other so that instances of colorism can be addressed and so that we may eventually break down the systematic oppression that exists within our country both intra-racially and interracially.
