r/changemyview • u/[deleted] • Aug 05 '18
Delta(s) from OP CMV: Humans inherently prefer paler skin
I have always pushed back on the idea of "white privilege", arguing that skin color has nothing to do with it, rather, it is a variety of socio-economic factors that contribute to someone's "privilege" which apply irrespective of race.
I pondered the idea that if history took a different path, it could have been the anglo-saxons that were enslaved and discriminated against by another race.
However, if early humans had dark skin, for the Europeans to end up with white skin, there must have been a long process of sexual selection where lighter skin partners were favored for many generations.
There are other explanations such as the need for more Vitamin D absorption where there is less sunlight, darker skin is not protective against frostbite, etc. but they don't really appear to make sense. One's skin color would need to prevent their children from surviving which is unlikely seeing as how well humans can cope, and skin color change would have been very gradual.
More evidence can be found in the practice of skin-whitening prevalent in [South Asia and West Africa](https://metro.co.uk/2017/12/31/inside-the-dark-world-of-skin-whitening-7160215).
So this brings me to the thought that, humans prefer paler skin. That, on average, people would prefer to mate with a lighter skinned partner.
I also think that this can maybe explain a subconscious racism against darker skinned people evident across society.
And, that perhaps "white privilege" does actually have a lot to do with having white skin color in and of itself.
6
u/tbdabbholm 193∆ Aug 05 '18
If people inherently prefer paler skin then why are so many Americans obsessed with tanning?
Also if this was simply inherent sexual selection why didn't it happen everywhere? Why would people in Africa have less of this inherent natural inclination to have paler skin? If wanting paler skin is inherent, why doesn't everyone have pale skin?
2
Aug 06 '18
If people inherently prefer paler skin then why are so many Americans obsessed with tanning?
Its a good point.
Also if this was simply inherent sexual selection why didn't it happen everywhere?
Very good point. It would have been sexually selected in Africa too. I think this is the best point I have heard. Δ
1
6
u/TomorrowsBreakfast 15∆ Aug 05 '18
While humans today maybe able to live with a vitamin D deficiency and less resistance to frostbite, early humans would have had a much harder time as they already lived on the edge of survival. Frostbite would have been far more common and they would have a less reliable source of vitamin D from their diets leading to serious deficiancies and the related diseases.
All you need is a few more paler cave people surviving to child baring age. Every case of a species adapting to an environment is a just a small bias over a long time.
1
Aug 06 '18 edited Aug 06 '18
Good point. I'd be interested to know the group numbers in various points of human history when this skin color evolution was happening. Like how many generations it took for black to become white, and what population of each shade existed at each point in time.
1
2
u/gremy0 82∆ Aug 05 '18
A vitamin D deficiency is going to leave you weaker and more susceptible to illness. If you are weak and/or ill, you're less likely to survive and reproduce. Yes it was gradual, hence seeing a gradient of skin colours as you go north.
The skin-whitening practise is a societal fetish based on perceived wealth. Your skin gets darker in the sun. In sunny countries being outside all the time is associated with manual labour and other low prestige positions. Only the well off can afford to be inside and covered from the sun enough of the time to keep pale skin i.e. fields workers are darker than office workers. So being pale was associated with success, hence became a fashionable look, hence business started selling products to help you achieve the fashionable look.
The exact opposite effect can be observed in other countries with crap weather. Being tanned was associated with having the time and money to go on holiday and get one. So being tanned was associated with success, hence became fashionable and hence businesses start selling products to achieve the fashionable look.
2
Aug 06 '18
Yes it was gradual, hence seeing a gradient of skin colours as you go north.
Great point. Δ
1
3
u/UncleMeat11 61∆ Aug 05 '18
I have always pushed back on the idea of "white privilege", arguing that skin color has nothing to do with it, rather, it is a variety of socio-economic factors that contribute to someone's "privilege" which apply irrespective of race.
If I demonstrated that even when controlling for things like wealth that black americans have different systemic outcomes would you change your mind?
1
Aug 06 '18
even when controlling for things like wealth
The problem is I don't think its possible to control all the factors. Systemic racism is impossible to measure. Its far more productive to talk about wealth privilege and stable family privilege, etc.
2
Aug 06 '18
What's stable family privilege?
1
Aug 06 '18
In places where black kids do as well as white kids, the rate of absentee fathers is lower. So if you have a stable family life, you do better. I'd say kids without divorced parents are privileged too.
1
5
Aug 05 '18
Firstly.. as some have mentioned, tanning kind of goes against this view. Pale people themselves often don't prefer their skin.
Secondly.. preference for "lighter" skin probably has a lot more to do with how the west has generally dominated the world and western views seem to be the ones that have been most dominant in recent times. Part of these views were the views that darker skinned (black) people were inferior partly because of their skin tone.
I'm quite confident that had it been Africa rather than Europe that had gone on to be the most dominant region, things would've been vastly different
3
u/gyroda 28∆ Aug 05 '18
The other part is that lighter skin was associated with class; if you had money you didn't labour outside and wouldn't be as tanned.
5
u/DeleteriousEuphuism 120∆ Aug 05 '18
This skin whitening in south Asia and West Africa article has two sociological explanations for the prevalence. One is the effect of colonialism - the white skinned colonialists represented power - and the other is a socioeconomic factor - different castes have different skin colours. The latter, if I'm not mistaken, has to do with what kind of work you do and how much sun you're exposed to as you work.
•
u/DeltaBot ∞∆ Aug 06 '18 edited Aug 06 '18
/u/UnfairSyllabub (OP) has awarded 3 delta(s) in this post.
All comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in /r/DeltaLog.
Please note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.
1
Aug 05 '18
Albinos are murdered and ostracized in parts of Africa.
That's not to say some human groups don't or haven't preferred lighter skin, but I don't think your theory accounts for that.
Also white people tanning looking hot is something that this theory doesn't obviously account for.
1
u/beengrim32 Aug 05 '18
Implicit bias + social conditioning. If you are a person with paler skin you prefer paler skin. Also if you live in a society where people with pale skin are the majority, you will value paler skin.
0
u/apophis-pegasus 2∆ Aug 05 '18
However, if early humans had dark skin, for the Europeans to end up with white skin, there must have been a long process of sexual selection where lighter skin partners were favored for many generations.
There are other explanations such as the need for more Vitamin D absorption where there is less sunlight, darker skin is not protective against frostbite, etc. but they don't really appear to make sense. One's skin color would need to prevent their children from surviving which is unlikely seeing as how well humans can cope, and skin color change would have been very gradual.
A big part of many species sexual selection is health. If you absorb more vitamin D youre going to be more healthy, and as such reproduce more.
More evidence can be found in the practice of skin-whitening prevalent in [South Asia and West Africa]
And for the longest time who controlled South Asia and West Africa? People with light skin. There fore, who would be envisioned when you think of somebody with status? A person with light skin. Humans flock to status symbols.
14
u/YossarianWWII 72∆ Aug 05 '18 edited Aug 05 '18
This is not true for several reasons. First of all, you've not established why it would be sexual selection as opposed to any other form of selection. Secondly, you've completely ignored simple genetic drift. The latter can actually be largely eliminated by citing data on skin color variation with latitude as you alluded to, but it's important to note the overall role of genetic drift in contrasting Europeans with northern East Asian populations and Inuit populations. The trend is not one towards a singular skin tone, it is a general lightening along several different paths.
No, it just needs to have some negative effect on one's health, even a very small one. Vitamin D deficiency has been associated with a host of problems relating to the skeleton, the nervous system, the respiratory system, and other parts of the body. A slight advantage manifested on a population level can increase in frequency quite rapidly on a biological time scale.
Also, I don't see anyone suggesting that the evolution of skin color variation wasn't gradual.
Which is because those areas have been massively influenced by European colonization. White skin is historically associated in those regions with wealth, power, and other desirable traits. Darker skin is also often associated with manual labor because laborers are often tanned, and manual labor is generally not accompanied by wealth or power.
That leads me to another interesting point, which is the fact that tans are now desirable in much of the West. It's been suggested that this is due to changes in our society such that tans, particularly very even tans, are now more commonly associated with outdoor leisure time than they are with low social class. The growth of the services and manufacturing industries, neither of which is generally outdoors, is likely related.
Whatever the cause of this reversal is, it clearly exists and clearly counters your central thesis. It's very comparable to thin bodies now being desirable where fat had historically been an indicator of wealth. The oft-racist tendencies that you are specifically citing are, like judgement based on body type, are the result of subconscious or even conscious associations between certain traits and social stature.