Foreign Affairs Discussion Group Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Noel de Leon who wrote (55233)	10/28/2002 5:44:03 PM
From: Ilaine	Read Replies (3) of 281500

One of my areas of study prior to going to law school was 19th century Louisiana literature, so I have read a lot about slavery from the point of view of slaveowners, slaves, former slaves, and the like. I have no idea why lighter skinned blacks look down on darker skinned blacks, but I think it was the case that being a house slave was more prestigious and desireable than being a field slave. Turning against someone in the same situation as you based purely on skin color is not pretty, in my opinion. I have no evidence that slave owners were prejudiced against darker slaves than lighter slaves, per se. Slaves had primarily economic value, and it would make no sense to put a slave into a job he or she was not suited for. I suspect that lighter skinned slaves had more value as sex objects, but the type of literature I read did not go into much detail about that. However, I believe it to be the case that in New Orleans, the lighter the woman, the more desireable she was as a mistress. Lighter skinned free blacks refused to associate with darker skinned free blacks. Whites in Paris did not make this distinction.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next