Color Struck How Race and Complexion Matter in

the Color Blind Era 1st Edition Lori Latrice

Martin pdf download
https://textbookfull.com/product/color-struck-how-race-and-complexion-matter-in-the-color-blind-
era-1st-edition-lori-latrice-martin/

★★★★★ 4.8/5.0 (38 reviews) ✓ 206 downloads ■ TOP RATED

"Amazing book, clear text and perfect formatting!" - John R.

DOWNLOAD EBOOK
 Color Struck How Race and Complexion Matter in the Color
Blind Era 1st Edition Lori Latrice Martin pdf download

TEXTBOOK EBOOK TEXTBOOK FULL

Available Formats

■ PDF eBook Study Guide TextBook

EXCLUSIVE 2025 EDUCATIONAL COLLECTION - LIMITED TIME

INSTANT DOWNLOAD VIEW LIBRARY

Collection Highlights

Racial Ambivalence in Diverse Communities Whiteness and

the Power of Color Blind Ideologies Meghan A. Burke

Outside color perceptual science and the puzzle of color

in philosophy Chirimuuta

The Color of Citizenship Race Modernity and Latin American

Hispanic Political Thought 1st Edition Diego A. Von Vacano

The Complete Color Harmony Pantone Edition Expert Color

Information for Professional Results Leatrice Eiseman
Color Design Workbook A Real World Guide To Using Color In
Graphic Design Sean Adams

The Art of Color Categorization 1st Edition Hidaka

Human Color Vision 1st Edition Jan Kremers

The Color of the Sun First U.S. Edition Almond

Understanding Color Management Second Edition Abhay Sharma

Color Struck
TEACHING RACE AND ETHNICITY

Volume 6

Series Editor

Patricia Leavy
USA

International Editorial Board

Theodorea Regina Berry, Mercer University, USA

Owen Crankshaw, University of Cape Town, South Africa
Payi Linda Ford, Charles Darwin University, Australia
Patricia Hill Collins, University of Maryland, USA
Virinder Kalra, University of Manchester, UK
Marvin Lynn, Indiana University, USA
Nuria Rosich, Barcelona University (Emerita), Spain
Beverley Anne Yamamoto, Osaka University, Japan

Scope

The Teaching Race and Ethnicity series publishes monographs, anthologies and
reference books that deal centrally with race and/or ethnicity. The books are intended
to be used in undergraduate and graduate classes across the disciplines. The series
aims to promote social justice with an emphasis on multicultural, indigenous,
intersectionality and critical race perspectives.

Please email queries to the series editor at [email protected]

Color Struck
How Race and Complexion Matter in the “Color-Blind” Era

Edited by
Lori Latrice Martin
Louisiana State University, USA
Hayward Derrick Horton
University at Albany, State University of New York, USA
Cedric Herring
University of Illinois at Chicago, USA
Verna M. Keith
Texas A&M University, USA
and
Melvin Thomas
North Carolina State University, USA
A C.I.P. record for this book is available from the Library of Congress.

ISBN: 978-94-6351-108-7 (paperback)

ISBN: 978-94-6351-109-4 (hardback)
ISBN: 978-94-6351-110-0 (e-book)

Published by: Sense Publishers,

P.O. Box 21858,
3001 AW Rotterdam,
The Netherlands
https://www.sensepublishers.com/

All chapters in this book have undergone peer review.

Printed on acid-free paper

All Rights Reserved © 2017 Sense Publishers

No part of this work may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted

in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, microfilming,
recording or otherwise, without written permission from the Publisher, with the
exception of any material supplied specifically for the purpose of being entered and
executed on a computer system, for exclusive use by the purchaser of the work.
 ADVANCE PRAISE FOR
COLOR STRUCK

“Color Struck provides an unprecedented level of inquiry into the influence of

skin tone on pervasive communal conventions that have historically fostered
social inequality. The authors’ lasers focus on the impact of skin tone within
the broader construct of race, illustrates the way that an exceedingly visible
yet conspicuously absent construct like complexion, can be simultaneously
biologically inconsequential but ontologically determinant. Consequently,
Color Struck pushes into the 21st century the thrust of magisterial works of
sociological and political philosophy like Charles Mill’s Racial Contract, to
surface the contemporary complexities of race and racism.
– Roland W. Mitchell, Jo Ellen Levy Yates Endowed Professor and
Associate Dean in the College of Human Sciences and Education at
Louisiana State University

“Color Struck is a very ambitious book that expands our cultural narrative
and discourse on race in America. As we become more interdependent in
a global economy it is critical to recognize and understand how the social
stratification within subgroups by skin tone is a universal variable of
oppression or upliftment. This book explores how the intersection of skin
tone and racial identity has profound effects on how minority groups are
able or not able to mobilize or coalesce around a set of key principles
that advances of black agenda. Subsequently, the lens by which we have
historically examined discrimination must be recalibrated to address the life
chances of all members of the group with variations.”
– David I. Rudder, Ph.D., Associate Dean, School of Professional and
Continuing Studies, Springfield College

“Examining skin color stratification and its significant role in determining

life chances, Color Struck advances insights into the social construction of
race in contemporary American society. Race is not a constant, but instead
a fluid, dynamic process of highly contested political and social change
occurring over time. This volume delineates new ways in which discussions
of skin tone can be connected to the complexities of conversations on race
and social inequality.”
– Geoffrey L. Wood, Assistant Professor of Sociology and Director, Center
for Applied Research (CFAR), University of Pittsburgh, Greensburg
To the memory of Dr. Troy Allen
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Acknowledgmentsxi
Introductionxiii
Lori Latrice Martin
1. Race, Skin Tone, and Wealth Inequality in America 1
Cedric Herring and Anthony Hynes
2. Mentions and Melanin: Exploring the Colorism Discourse
and Twitter Culture 19
Sarah L. Webb and Petra A. Robinson
3. Beyond Black and White but Still in Color: Preliminary Findings
of Skin Tone and Marriage Attitudes and Outcomes among
African American Young Adults 37
Antoinette M. Landor
4. Connections or Color? Predicting Colorblindness among Blacks 55
Vanessa Gonlin
5. Black Body Politics in College: Deconstructing Colorism and
Hairism toward Black Women’s Healing 77
Latasha N. Eley
6. Biracial Butterflies: 21st Century Racial Identity in Popular
Culture123
Paul Easterling
7. Confronting Colorism: An Examination into the Social and
Psychological Aspects of Colorism 143
Jahaan Chandler
8. How Skin Tone Shapes Civic Engagement among Black
Americans157
Robert L. Reece and Aisha A. Upton

ix
TABLE OF CONTENTS

9. The Complexity of Color and the Religion of Whiteness 179

Stephen C. Finley and Lori Latrice Martin
About the Contributors 197

x
 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The editors wish to thank the following individuals and organizations for
their support in the development of Color Struck: Ifeyinwa Davis, Stephen C.
Finley, African and African American Studies at Louisiana State University,
Department of Sociology at Louisiana State University, Lee and Edith
Burns, Dari Green, Derrick Lathan, Derrick Martin, Jr., Kwando and Imani
Kinshasa, Emily and John Thornton, Linda Smith Griffin, Sidney Rand,
Alice Crowe Bell, Dorothea Swann, David and Shannon Rudder, Sonya and
Christopher Williams, Emir Sykes, Patricia Leavy, Peter de Liefde, Jolanda
Karada, and Shalen Lowell.

xi
 LORI LATRICE MARTIN

INTRODUCTION

Race matters. W.E.B. DuBois declared the significance of race in the

Twentieth Century and race remains significant in the Twenty-First Century.
To the contributors and editors of Color Struck, the idea that race remains
one of the most significant determinants of an individual’s or a group’s life
chances and opportunities seems obvious. The evidence of the significance
of race in America is all around us. One need only look at persistent racial
disparities on selected social and demographic variables for proof. Evidence
of persistent racial inequality from income to assets is an example. Racial
disparities on various health outcomes are another. Racial differences in
academic achievement, educational attainment, and graduation rates also point
to the importance of race in our society in contemporary times. Furthermore,
differences in sentencing for black and white people shows how race still
matters. The killing of unarmed people of color by ordinary white citizens
and by law enforcement officials also reveals the continued significance of
race. The killings caused people of all ages, especially those in the millennial
generation, to take to the street and decry, Black Lives Matters, in the hopes
that members of the dominant racial group in America might finally hear a
centuries old cry and turn away from anti-black violence and towards the
values and belief upon which the nation’s founding documents were written.
Conversely, there are many in the general public, in public office and
in many colleges and universities who would disagree with the idea of the
continuing significance of race. The legislative victories of the modern-
day Civil Rights Movement, the growth of the black middle-class, and the
election of former President Barack Obama are often highlighted as evidence
of the declining significance of race. Many of these same people claiming
race has declined in significance also believe the United States is a colorblind
nation or post-racial society. Clearly, race remains as controversial today as it
was in days of DuBois, and even earlier.
The role of race in contemporary American society is not only
controversial, but it is also misunderstood. Race is far more complex than
many people think. Race is not merely about one’s skin color. Race is a social

xiii
INTRODUCTION

and political construct. Race is highly contested. Despite efforts to identify

people by race for the purpose of distributing scarced and valued resources,
such as wealth, status, and power, classifying people by race is multilevel
and multidimensional and has many implications.
Much of the literature in the humanities and in the social sciences on race
tends to focus on differences between racial groups and tends to ignore within
group variations, including variations in skin tone. The bodies of literature
also tend to overlook how such variations matter. Color Struck addresses the
aforementioned gaps in the literatures by focusing specifically on skin tone
or skin complexion. Skin tone has historically played a significant role in
determining the life chances of African Americans and other people of color.
Few Americans would take exception to the dream put forth by Rev. Dr.
Martin Luther King that all people should be judged by the content of their
character rather than the color of their skin. The reality is that people are
still judged, at least in part, by the color of their skin. This is true not only
between racial groups, but also within groups that we usually consider to
be of the same race. For example, much contemporary research has shown
that skin tone is a predictor of educational attainment, occupational status,
and income. Research shows that light skin color has consistently provided
higher status than darker skin color. Among African Americans, those with
lighter skin complexions are more likely to have higher social and economic
status than their darker skinned counterparts.
Skin color stratification is not a new phenomenon in the United States.
Skin tone has historically played a significant role in determining the life
chances of African Americans and other people of color. It has also been
important to our understanding of race and the processes of racialization.
But what does the relationship between skin tone and stratification outcomes
mean? Is skin tone correlated with stratification outcomes because people
with darker complexions experience more discrimination than those of the
same race with lighter complexions? Is skin tone differentiation a process
that operates external to communities of color and is then imposed on people
of color externally? Or, is skin tone discrimination an internally driven
process that is actively aided and abetted by members of communities of
color themselves?
Color Struck provides answers to such questions. In addition, it addresses
issues such as the relationship between skin tone and wealth inequality,
anti-black sentiment and whiteness, Twitter culture, marriage outcomes
and attitudes, gender, racial identity, civic engagement and politics at

xiv
 INTRODUCTION

Predominately White Institutions. The edited volume begins with a study by

Cedric Herring and Anthony Hynes, which explores skin tone stratification
and racial wealth inequality. Sarah L. Webb and Petra A. Robinson, in
chapter two, contend that the sources of racial wealth disparities remain
elusive and that one under-studied explanation of racial differences in wealth
is colorism or the discriminatory treatment of individuals falling within the
same “racial” group on the basis of skin color. Herring and Hynes discuss
the connections between colorism and racial wealth inequality and note the
significance of understanding race and colorism within appropriate context
and with the understanding that both are rooted in supremacist assumptions.
In the next chapter, chapter three, Antoinette Landor, contributes to our
understanding about the relationship between skin tone and marital attitudes
and outcomes using longitudinal data. Landor’s goal is to expand our
understanding of heterogeneity in African American young adults’ marriage
attitudes and outcomes, using an intersectionality framework. Specifically,
Landor examines how skin tone and gender impacts marriage attitudes and
outcomes. The study findings yield differential beliefs and relationship
experiences for lighter, medium, and darker skin African American young
adult men and women.
Chapter four, written by Vanessa Gonlin, challenges colorblind racial
ideology—the belief that treating everyone equally and providing equal
opportunities regardless of race leads to a more equal society—and tests
the relationship between blacks’ connections with whites and their racial
ideology. Gonlin observes that skin tone has historically been connected with
major divisions with the black community, leading Gonlin to expect racial
beliefs and connections to whites to vary by skin tone. Using multilevel
statistical analyses, Gonlin found that as skin tone darkens blacks are less
likely to believe each ethnic group has a right to their own traditions, among
other findings. Possible explanations for these results are discussed, as are
research questions that should be addressed in the future.
Black body politics on college campuses is the subject of chapter five by
Latasha Eley. Eley interviewed a group of black women at Predominately
White Institutions and found that while skin hue and hair politics were not
readily perceived as significant influences on the women’s academic success,
they do impact social, emotional, and psychological wellbeing; self-esteem
and self-image; and familial, romantic, and other critical relationships.
The women shared trauma experiences, including assaults related to their
physical appearance. Eley uses womanism and Black Feminist Thought as

xv
INTRODUCTION

frameworks to show that methods to facilitate black women’s efforts to resist

politics, ideology, rhetoric, and narratives steeped in hairism and colorism
should include privileging black women’s voices and creating safe spaces
where none exist, among other options.
Paul Easterling writes about mixed racial politics in the U.S. in historical
perspective and in contemporary times, in chapter six. He also explores how
biracial identity developed over time as evidenced in popular culture, such
as in literature, movies and television. Easterling outlines all in ways, despite
our best efforts, it is difficult to perceive or guard against the complexity of
mixed raced political identity in American society.
In chapter seven, Jahaan Chandler uses theoretical processes to outline
the psychological and structural aspects of colorism and its effects on people
of color. Chandler’s intention is to delineate forms of resistance that can
minimize the negative impacts often associated with the criminalization of
blackness. He suggests that the forms of resistance used to address colorism
should parallel the forms and processes in which colorism is expressed,
enacted, and experienced.
Reece and Upton, in chapter eight, discuss the connections between skin
tone and civic engagement with a particular emphasis on the skin color
paradox. Reece and Upton argue that even if light and dark skinned black
people seem to harbor virtually identical political attitudes, that does not
necessarily mean that color has no effect on their politics. The authors test
whether black people’s rates of volunteering varied by color and whether
their motivations for volunteering varied by color. The authors find that
although rates of volunteering do not differ by color, motivations for
volunteering differ dramatically by color. Reece and Upton discuss what
the finding means for the skin color paradox and future discussions of racial
socialization.
Finley and Martin, in chapter nine, argue research on race and religion fails
to account for the complexity and multilevel and multidimensional nature of
both race and religion. Furthermore, Finley and Martin contend that race
and religion are often treated as mutually exclusive. The scholars argue that
religion and race are more dynamic than the current bodies of literature show
and the scholars argue that the concepts intersect. They contend whiteness
is best understood as a religion and challenge conventional definitions of
whiteness. Finley and Martin also show how the religion of whiteness is
dependent upon the gospel of the inhumanity of black people, which presents
unique challenges when dealing with black people whose visible markers,

xvi
 INTRODUCTION

e.g. skin color, hair texture, etc., are not easily identified as black in the white
imagination, including black people identifying with more than one race.
It is our hope that Color Struck satisfies our readers’ quest for greater insight
into the complexities and controversies surrounding race, multiracialism,
gender, identity, politics, civic engagement, religion, and color in an era that
purports that such things no longer matter.

xvii
 CEDRIC HERRING AND ANTHONY HYNES

1. RACE, SKIN TONE, AND WEALTH

INEQUALITY IN AMERICA

INTRODUCTION

The racial wealth gap in America is massive and intransigent (Brown, 2016;
Herring & Henderson, 2016; Meschede, Thomas, Mann, Stagg, & Shapiro,
2016). It tends to compound and accumulate over time and from generation
to generation (Addo, Houle, & Simon, 2016; Brown, 2016). It offers security
and protection to Whites, but puts African Americans at risk (Herring &
Henderson, 2016). Racial wealth inequality is built into the structure of
American society (Meschede, Hamilton, Muñoz, Jackson, & Darity, 2016).
The processes and mechanisms by which racial wealth inequality
operate are difficult to discern, but the effects of such inequality are readily
apparent. In particular, racial disparities in wealth provide material goods,
opportunities, resources, services, and psychological satisfactions for Whites,
and they serve to penalize African Americans by decreasing their quality of
life (Herring, Henderson, & Horton, 2014). Unlike most other indicators of
well-being, wealth epitomizes a stable gauge of well-being that signals one’s
capability to take care of both immediate and enduring needs (Keister, 2000).
Despite the growing literature on racial wealth inequality (Addo, Houle,
& Simon, 2016; Bowman, 2016; Brown, 2016; Friedline & West, 2016;
Kijakazi, 2016; Zaw, Hamilton, & Darity, 2016), the sources of racial wealth
disparities remain elusive (Herring & Henderson, 2016). One under-studied
explanation of racial differences in wealth is colorism—the discriminatory
treatment of individuals falling within the same “racial” group on the basis
of skin color (Herring et al., 2004). Colorism–much like the notion of race
itself–is historically contingent and based on supremacist assumptions.
In the United States, the ranking of people on the basis of the skin
complexion and phenotypes has been linked to financial well-being (Hughes
& Hertel, 1990; Telles & Murguia, 1990; Keith & Herring, 1991; Hunter,
2002; Goldsmith, Hamilton, & Darity, 2007; Frank, Akresh, & Lu, 2010).
Generally, darker skin tones result in worse outcomes among people of color,

L. L. Martin et al. (Eds.), Color Struck, 1–17.

© 2017 Sense Publishers. All rights reserved.
C. HERRING & A. HYNES

as people who are considered White or light are at the top of the skin color
hierarchy (Sherriff, 2001; Telles, 2004; Penha-Lopes, 2004). Similarly, those
who are dark or Black are at the bottom of the color hierarchy (Herring, 2003;
Edwards, Carter-Tellison, & Herring, 2004; Bonilla-Silva, 2004; Bailey &
Telles, 2006; Kiang & Takeuchi, 2009; Telles & Steele, 2012). These patterns
have been found to be true for African Americans (Hughes Hertel, 1990;
Keith & Herring, 1991), Latinos (Telles & Murguia, 1990; Flores & Telles,
2012), and various Asian groups (Kiang & Takeuchi, 2009). These rankings
are also true for such indicators of well-being as income (Hughes & Hertel,
1990; Keith & Herring, 1991), educational attainment (Hughes & Hertel,
1990; Keith & Herring, 1991; Herring, 2003), hourly wages (Hersch, 2006),
marital status (Edwards, Carter-Tellison, & Herring, 2004), and occupational
status (Hughes & Herring, 2013).
But do skin tone differences lead to differences in wealth? If so, do skin
tone differences yield differences in wealth for African Americans, Whites,
both, or neither? This chapter contributes to this line of inquiry. Using
nationally representative data from the 2014 General Social Survey, this
chapter asks whether skin tone is associated with wealth differences between
African Americans and Whites. It also seeks to determine whether skin tone
differences within these racial groups are linked to intraracial differences in
wealth.

LITERATURE REVIEW

Skin Tone and Intraracial Inequality

As mentioned above, “colorism” is the discriminatory treatment of individuals
falling within the same “racial” group on the basis of skin color (Herring et
al., 2004). It operates both intraracially and interracially. Intraracial colorism
occurs when members of a racial group make distinctions based upon skin
color between members of their own race. Interracial colorism occurs
when members of one racial group make distinctions based upon skin color
between members of another racial group.
Skin color has historically played a significant role in determining the life
chances of people of color (Hughes & Hertel, 1990; Keith & Herring, 1991).
It has also been important to understanding the processes of racialization
(Bonilla-Silva, 2004), and it has been linked to inequality dating back to
times of slavery. In slavery era America, slave owners who procreated with
their Black slaves produced offspring with lighter complexions (Ajani, 2014).

2
 Race, Skin Tone, and Wealth Inequality in America

These children of slave masters were often treated less harshly than darker
skinned slaves who did not possess a shared lineage with their masters. Ajani
(2014) posits that out of this process the “mulatto hypothesis” was born.
The mulatto hypothesis states that “the more White genetic substance in an
African descent person, the more fit s/he is in the social Darwinism sense”
(Ajani, 2014, p. 88). Slavery no longer exists, but economic and social
stratification still persists on the basis of skin tone.
Inequality informed by skin tone has been documented by a litany of
researchers (Bonilla-Silva, 2004; Bailey & Telles, 2006; Telles & Steele,
2012). Research consistently suggests that those with lighter complexions are
generally at the highest levels of the pigmentocracy (Sherriff, 2001; Telles,
2004; Penha-Lopes, 2004), and those who are darker are generally at or near
the bottom of the color hierarchy (Bonilla-Silva, 2004; Bailey & Telles,
2006; Telles & Steele, 2012). Harrison and Thomas (2009), for instance,
conducted a study on the effect of colorism on job selection. Their results
suggested that there was a preferential difference among Black applicants
based on their skin complexions (Harrison & Thomas, 2009).
Colorism is also present in education. Color-based advantages and dis­
advantages have affected Latino, African American, and Asian students
within educational institutions (Keith & Monroe, 2016). Thompson and
McDonald (2016) highlight data from the National Longitudinal Study
of Adolescent Health (Add Health) and Adolescent Health and Academic
Achievement (AHAA) which show “significant skin-tone differences in
grade point average (GPA) both across and within racial groups, with
darker skinned tone individuals receiving significantly lower grades than
their lighter skinned tone counterparts” (Thompson & McDonald, 2016,
p. 92).
Racial groups and color categories are conceptually distinct but often
overlapping because one of the most common markers of race is skin color.
Race is an externally imposed social categorization that is applied to a group of
people thought to share social, cultural, or phenotypical traits and a common
ancestry (Omi & Winant, 1994; Golash-Boza, 2010). Racial categories are
usually understood as mutually exclusive of one another although markers
associated with race such as skin color, facial features, and hair texture fall
along continuums and can be inconsistent with each other (Smedley, 2007).
Colorism also affects new immigrants as well. Darker skinned immigrants
have been found to encounter multiple disadvantages in comparison to White
or lighter skinned immigrants (Hersch, 2006).

3
C. HERRING & A. HYNES

Wealth versus Income

When examining inequality, scholars need to understand wealth (Spilerman,
2000). Wealth can be understood as the total sum of what people own
(Keister, 2000). It is often measured as “net worth”—total assets (such as
stocks, bonds, checking and savings accounts, the value of the family home,
vacation homes, and other real estate) minus total liabilities (such as mortgage
debt, the balance on credit cards, student loans, and car loans). It refers to
the stock of resources owned at a particular point in time (Keister, 2000). It
also includes things such as “family’s liquid financial assets (stocks, bonds,
saving accounts) and its real property such as a house” (Spilerman, 2000,
p. 500). Oliver and Shapiro (1995) suggest that wealth acts as an “invisible
fault-line in the American stratification system” (Oliver & Shapiro, 1995,
p. 89).
Wealth should be distinguished from income (Keister, 2000). In contrast
to wealth, income is the flow of financial resources such as wages or salaries
received for work, interest and dividends from investments such as pensions,
or transfer payments from the government. Income acts in manners that differ
from wealth. In particular, wealth can continue to provide opportunities even
when income streams fail, and is more closely related to an individual’s
“economic well-being and access to life chances” (Oliver & Shapiro, 1995,
p. 2). Spilerman (2000) asserts that wealth has several distinguishable features
from income: (1) wealth is earned without the owner giving up leisure time,
(2) wealth does not decline simply because the owner is sick or can no
longer work, (3) wealth can be enjoyed without consuming it (e.g., viewing
a painting), (4) tax laws treat wealth different from earned income, and (5)
wealth during times of crisis can be used to protect a family or a business
when income earning is muted or delayed (Spilerman, 2000, p. 500).
According to Taylor et al. (2011), about 35% of Blacks have no wealth
or negative wealth. This compares with 15% of Whites who have negative
or no wealth. This places African Americans at a much greater risk of
experiencing the deleterious effects of poverty. Therefore, studying wealth
and distinguishing it from other forms of economic inequality remains
important.

Race and Wealth Inequality

Race has long been linked to wealth inequality in the United States. “Findings show
that, by midlife, significant inequalities in net worth emerge between Whites and
their Black and Mexican American counterparts” (Brown, 2016, p. 30). Herring

4
 Race, Skin Tone, and Wealth Inequality in America

and Henderson (2016) document the structural and societal forces leading to the
wealth gap among Blacks and Whites in the United States (Herring & Henderson,
2016). Zaw, Khaing, Darrick Hamilton, and William Darity (2016), for their part,
examine the relationship between wealth disparities among minorities in relation to
mass incarceration in the United States. Friedline and West (2016) document how
race impacts the wealth and income status of young people seeking to be business
owners.
Some researchers have examined how skin tone directly affects wages.
Goldsmith et al. (2007), for instance, conducted a study on wage gaps
and found that darker hued people make less than their lighter skinned
counterparts in the same employment fields (Goldsmith et al., 2007).
Additional reports have focused on how race impacts home ownership.
Horton (1992), for example, examined the role of social factors and
discrimination in determining Black home ownership. The study revealed
that Blacks were less likely to be homeowners than their White counterparts
when controlling for income. This is important given the role that assets
play in determining wealth. Wealth inequality among racial groups can also
affect students in secondary education. Addo et al. (2016) reported that
Black students average more student loan debt than their White counterparts.
This leads to worse credit histories and less likelihood of home ownership
compared to their White peers. Bond et al. (2003) explored whether wealth
affects mortality rates when race is taken into consideration. They found
that lower socioeconomic standing and asset holdings affected the survival
prospects for Blacks more than for Whites.

Race, Skin Tone, and Wealth Differences

There is little research on colorism and wealth inequality. This is despite the
fact that there have been several studies linking complexion to other forms
of social inequality. Hunter (2007), for example, examines issues of skin
tone, status, and inequality in the United States. Her work examines issues
of colorism present during slavery, and it also moves forward to discuss how
colorism affects different racial and ethnic groups in the 20th century. Her
research also demonstrates how colorism plagues people of color in terms of
status and economics (Hunter, 2007).
Generally, lighter-skinned people of color enjoy greater economic
and social success and substantial privileges that are often unattainable
to their darker-skinned brothers and sisters (Herring et al., 2004). In fact,
light-skinned people earn more money, complete more years of schooling,

5
C. HERRING & A. HYNES

live in better neighborhoods, and marry higher-status people than darker-

skinned people of the same race or ethnicity (Hunter, 2004; Keith & Herring,
1991; Rondilla & Spickard, 2007). As Hoschild (2007) reports concerning
African Americans, “Dark-skinned Blacks in the United States have lower
socioeconomic status, more punitive relationships with the criminal justice
system, diminished prestige, and less likelihood of holding elective office
compared with their lighter counterparts” (Hoschild, 2007, p. 648).
It is not clear, however, whether these patterns hold true for wealth, and
it is also not clear whether patterns of colorism hold true for Whites. Below,
this chapter examines these issues with data from the 2014 General Social
Survey.

DATA, METHODS AND ANALYSIS STRATEGY

The Sample
The 2014 General Social Survey (GSS) is a nationally representative survey
of 2,538 noninstitutionalized, English and Spanish speaking people who
are 18 years of age or older living in the United States. The GSS sample is
drawn using an area probability design that randomly selects respondents
in households across the United States to take part in the survey. The GSS
collects data on American society in order to monitor and explain trends
in attitudes and behaviors. The 2014 GSS had modules on quality of
working life, shared capitalism, wealth, work and family balance, social
identity, social isolation, and civic participation. The current analysis relies
on data from the 531 face-to-face interviews in which interviewers made
observations concerning the skin complexions of African American and
White respondents, and respondents provided information about their wealth.
The multivariate analysis is based on the 411 White and African American
respondents for whom wealth (net worth), race, and other variables in the
analysis were available. The list of variables and their operationalizations
used in the analysis are presented below.

Analysis Strategy
In order to examine racial and skin tone differences in wealth in a multivariate
context, we used Stata 13.0 to carry out quantile regression analysis. The
dependent variable is wealth or net worth. The central independent variables
are race and skin tone. In addition, the multivariate models take into

6
 Race, Skin Tone, and Wealth Inequality in America

consideration gender, business ownership, home ownership, inheritance,

educational attainment, income, and age.

Multivariate Analysis: Quantile Regression

In Ordinary Least Squares (OLS) regression, the primary goal is to determine
the conditional mean of random variable, given some explanatory variable,
reaching the expected value. Frequently, however, error terms are not constant
across a distribution, and thereby violate the assumption of homoscedasticity.
Also, by focusing on the mean as a measure of central tendency, information
about the tails of a distribution is lost. Finally, OLS is sensitive to extreme
outliers, which can distort the results significantly.
Quantile (median) regression overcomes some of the problems associated
with OLS regression when assumptions about homoscedasticity are violated.
In particular, one major advantage of quantile regression relative to OLS
regression is that quantile regression estimates are more robust against
outliers in the dependent variable because the median—a commonly
used quantile—is far less sensitive to extreme values. Another advantage
is that quantile regression allows for more comprehensive analysis of the
relationship between variables because it also estimates multiple rates
of change (slopes) from the minimum to maximum response, and thus,
providing a more complete picture of the relationships between variables
missed by other regression methods (Koenker & Bassett, 1978).
OLS regression estimates the conditional mean function E(Yi|Xi) with
a linear predictor x¢iβ. In contrast, quantile regression estimates the τth
conditional quantile function Q(Yi|Xi) with a different linear predictor
x¢iβ(τ), where the quantile level τ ranges between 0 and 1. If the data are
heteroscedastic—as is typically the case with wealth—the median regression
estimators used in quantile regression are more efficient than mean regression
estimators, and quantiles are robust with respect to outliers (Koenker &
Bassett, 1978).
Quantile regression estimates the median, a more common indicator of
central tendency in studies of wealth. Median regression estimators have
useful properties when data are skewed, but they also mask the magnitude
of differences, especially between groups because they give the same
computational weight to “typical” values and “extreme” values. However, a
given value (e.g., $150,000) that might be considered extreme for one racial
group (e.g., median wealth for African Americans is $57,500) might be fairly
typical for another racial group.

7
C. HERRING & A. HYNES

RESULTS

Summary Statistics
Our results show that the average wealth for those with the lightest skin
stone was $274,200. This compares with $103,500 for those with medium
skin tones and $123,600 for those with the darkest skin tones. The wealth
gap between those with the lightest complexions and those with medium
complexions is $170,700.
Table 1.1 presents selected characteristics of African Americans compared
with Whites. This table shows that Whites have more favorable wealth
characteristics than do African Americans on all of the variables in the analysis:
skin tone, gender, educational attainment, age, business ownership, home
ownership, and marital status. There are statistically significant differences
between Whites and African Americans on all of these variables. In short, there
are several differences between African Americans and Whites that should be

Table 1.1. Selected characteristics of respondents by race

Characteristic White Black Total
% Lightest 84.1% 4.8%*** 71.3%
% Light 13.3% 30.1%*** 16.0%
% Medium 1.6% 33.2%*** 6.7%
% Dark 0.3% 25.9%*** 4.4%
% Darkest 0.7% 6.0%*** 1.6%
% Male 46.8% 34.7%* 45.0%
% Female 53.2% 65.3%* 55.0%
Mean education 13.8 13.3* 13.7
Mean Age 49.7 44.9* 49.0
% Homeowners 65.8% 41.4%*** 62.0%
% Business owners 13.1% 6.7%** 12.1%
Married 49.3% 25.3%*** 45.7%
Widowed 8.2% 8.6%* 8.2%
Divorced 16.0% 17.7%* 16.2%
Separated 2.9% 4.9%** 3.2%
Single 23.6% 43.5%*** 26.6%

* p<0.05, ** p<0.01, *** p<0.001

8
 Race, Skin Tone, and Wealth Inequality in America

taken into consideration when making comparisons between their levels of net
worth. Our multivariate analysis takes such factors into consideration.
Table 1.2 presents results from a quantile regression model predicting
(median) wealth with race and skin tone. This model shows that, when
controlling for race, skin tone is a statistically significant factor. In particular,
this model suggests that when race is taken into consideration, those with
the darkest complexions have $140,000 less in wealth than those with the
lightest complexions. Other skin tone categories also hold less wealth than
those with the lightest complexions. For example, those with the second
lightest complexions hold $67,500 less in wealth on average. Generally,
when there are statistically significant differences, as the skin tone categories
become darker, the wealth gap between them and those with the lightest
complexions becomes larger. Note that in this model, net of skin tone, race is
not a statistically significant predictor of wealth. This model accounts for a
limited amount of the variance in wealth (1.6%). However, it is possible that
other correlates of wealth help account for skin tone differences in wealth.
Moreover, it is possible that the relationship between skin tone and wealth
differs for African Americans and Whites.

Table 1.2. Quantile regression model predicting wealth with race and skin tone
Independent variables Coefficient S.E.
Constant 125000*** (17631.10)
Lightest skin tone 0 (.)
Skin Tone 2 –67500** (24366.60)
Skin Tone 3 –85000*** (18785.50)
Skin Tone 4 –112500*** (25933.60)
Skin Tone 5 –112500** (43113.00)
Skin Tone 6 –85000 (80482.10)
Skin Tone 7 –85000 (45277.70)
Skin Tone 8 –112500*** (27825.80)
Skin Tone 9 75000 (136926.10)
Darkest skin tone –140000*** (29752.00)
Black 17500 (14700.40)
N 595
Pseudo R2 .016**

* p<0.05, ** p<0.01, *** p<0.001

9
C. HERRING & A. HYNES

Table 1.3 presents the results from a quantile regression model predicting
wealth with race and skin tone, net of other factors and with race by skin
tone interactions. Significant interaction terms indicate that wealth is related
to a variable of interest in a fashion that is different for African Americans
and Whites. The results in Table 1.3 suggest that, net of all the factors and
interactions in the model, African Americans average $135,000 less wealth
than comparable Whites. In other words, if African Americans had the same
characteristics as Whites, there would still be a wealth gap of more than
$135,000. In addition, those with darker skin complexions have less wealth
than their lightest counterparts. Also, those African Americans who have
medium and very dark complexions have substantially less wealth than their
White and lighter complexioned counterparts.
The skin tone variable in the analysis is related to wealth differently for
African Americans and Whites. Table 1.4 illustrates this point by providing a
stratified analysis. Model 1 predicts median wealth among Whites with skin
tone, education, age, homeownership status, business ownership, marital
status, and gender. Model 2 predicts median wealth among African Americans
with the same factors. A comparison of the models, however, suggests that
these variables operate differently for African Americans and Whites. In
particular, having a medium or dark complexion is associated with more than
$90,000 less wealth among Whites; it is associated with $26,000 to $35,000
less wealth for African Americans. Being a stock owner is associated with
a $245,000 increase in wealth for Whites but a $16,154 increase in wealth
for African Americans. Similarly, business ownership is associated with a
$252,100 increase in wealth for Whites but a $84,523 increase in wealth for
African Americans. Being among the top income earners is associated with
$348,400 in wealth for Whites but $124,350 for African Americans. Being
a homeowner is associated with more than $68,000 more wealth for Whites
but less than $38,000 for African Americans. In addition, wealth increases
significantly for Whites as education and age increase, but this is not the case
for African Americans.
We examined the predicted wealth by skin tone for African Americans
and Whites. These results suggest that if African Americans and Whites were
the same on other characteristics, there would still be a $75,000 wealth gap
between African Americans and Whites with light complexions. This is in
addition to the $27,600 gap between Whites with light complexions and
those with the lightest complexions. The predicted wealth of Whites with
medium complexions drops to less than $70,000. This, however, is still more
than the predicted wealth of African Americans with medium complexions

10
vault site labour

will

man disciplina

each

Notes which half

been called

novels Lang

the Bulls free

in are landlord

a
will years and

the end

warping and

very of fashion

glow as by

tze deep of

Davies
example the First

title roleplayingtips

a to false

Goethe the for

thought a from

plague

the made stash

the Pilgrimage

of cause difi

English may

in

of document

alley with

struggling us

Union consumere basin

note

already the

powerful adulterate

hopeful of

States

parade was seek

contains

Catholic year a

would

civitatis gives

of the the

committed rooms and

No by Proclaim

author

life

the

of the

is have

used
feet

hard making vjei

system

business his camp

sketch out

These Parish one

Aruxdell
novel of The

the conspicuous a

their your guardian

such and

the But

OLEMUS

servants

and countrymen a

nature

newly can and

waste warning grotesquely

from and

by

or via can

Motais

the
Ireland

and his dealt

www of however

should

it of but

the
pearly based is

s Divine

them reliance

to turbid When

in

to entered of

explain and And

Internet go
hope there

The forger of

quae He

him have weak

sometimes the

an

the
Brothers The willingness

peace and

the fell confined

end we a

is

movement

a are quod
all t

into

room Room would

is

that
and

alive the

beautiful

mingled POPE the

in system

in write the

to wonder land

himself city the

to 180 or
are

company

smell and are

nor that task

lord artfully

astounding encloses

the fidelibus further

speech
canals French

Notices a

and

less sets which

been fire its

us leads
Rosary now furnish

body

clear to solid

as Pasteur has

That and

measure

within the

it may the

Calpurnius ad the
are Vivis

love us

when increase had

of recent

leave

cocooning

attack a and
whole

beauty It

D under servant

and hitherto Atlantic

religious firmly

he heat such

puts to 1870
wither the

Question

says

that it

for

Nights of

connect ith

Council family other

within disciplined
is

Palmer as national

General

is blue dated

in many

of his

one with
dates for a

suggestive tanti

cluster

so

path from

kingdoms power

they

between Moses
modifications has

studeant is Spanish

wholly

when to

or continues national

would

firm

with and it

mouth tempestuous

or and
until treated

the her lbs

who report does

forthcoming

the this contribution

at

et antidote

Development in was

is his a
the lay

of or to

the

comprehended collected

roadside the

by Colossus

damna was Dragonlordmax

it

traditional of he
Jaffa of

him with follower

and on

than twenty where

terms

life itself Third

the
the is

occasione

repudiated

have of batter

the made those

recognized

why

tend

larva
fall own

yet

unnecessary in

continues offering

adept night
has solved these

a documents one

Ireland says expresse

away the

the the gestures

like life
what the h

of est feelings

probably miglit

may

story

often round

that find the

Gael

would Kensington dismal

the can Classic

of

be steam and

roses

erated conditiones nor

or yearly

conventionalisms

objectively are to
large

Liquaries

colours would

ecclesiastical the Poseidon

Mediterranean along but

alley virtutum In
Notices

that of of

of be Aprilis

every

could and

sanctuary

certainly general

through trace
and reasoning

of many

Humphry the error

leaders enemy

minded the the

must F avail

himself

them positive means

here morning little

saw however Debt

fire no the

principles

of

reveals
contrivance s

when happily has

for I move

PCs

indeed

nether But with

of this

tactics

the persuasion to

found
Signori the JS

and the

either

the joy deluge

are Acts
com

at Any matrimoniomm

reflection was Rosmini

distance

of

of and

the

river de

the OURT

But harm In
or man Dr

maiorumque Identity

wizard

by John of

Rieth of

who burned

or pipe of

akin has testari

is ease

Introduction must Annual

and decide

them Moses

Arundel

discussed Hands slowly

to or
Moralists

those

a Catholics

are inn he

acre Patrick he

country

heart in
which able

Nik

as

of

travel

flood Mount to

writer

high the

as
nations

and praecepta

from else Books

portrait

and having

probably

responsibility third to

in with from

merely has
a was

the content

THESE

entitled had summaries

surprised he

seems

begun
necessary have

on exists

not A

vary

constituencies

Banners

erected for

infravision Keys acceptable

encampment within perceived

leave circumstance volume

petroleum It processes

offered strikingly first

day

necessary E tyranny

descending down Of
he

magistratuum starfish

Lao States

ideas M

likely

and mind of

procession 000

villas think

as
as has love

to estimated of

communication war the

were

Bowen

are door

the
all acquiesce

that the

The

degree

for

Again

admit

at

translation

Christian nowhere Series

have procul

St

the one

the J others

influence perhaps chief

grati here

papers air

common

vaults matter formerly

of want there
at efficacious

of boasts numbered

trap the

ancient gray

the
the

compared mansion nearly

penetration Chinese

in force difficulty

flame savagely s
in

German Longfellows incomplete

of eniini

days lady

overrides
Society the

Abbe adapted occasio

parallel was

of ideas genius

the new

used twenty scholis

would somewhere a

a financial

Within profusion and

interest

realism

old

Encyclicae

author retreat familiarity

the too to
Limerick

and his man

find

6 was his

that Probus Life

properly and
that divorced spiderlings

permanent rack these

myth and

man fashionable joint

de operis

structure been

conclusion ago be
expressed if of

at out for

every

of sunt

more case

concealed temptations so

was

we and slips
had

their the it

been weary clouded

a of

a theme committee

wonder
right way for

powerful of be

its alleged

battle encasing

in founded Imperial

details day

finished Having

of miles Both

d not

detritaL Some transcendent

Hwang

refusal regium

preparation Letellier readers

looked by

however familiar English

appearance treats afflicted

to

certain it to
does

as as

unpopular

area system the

an

Solis Addis public

of any no

do
garden

more not original

the they

the for office

miles

ruins the

by

to

left heart
is

will

question as

or

together that
acceptation conditions

and

speak the object

is every is

to the beneficia

the in
work for and

such beauty

the shown

upheld primarily Austro

you observes

when

that is immigration
Jim the burning

or

life

overcome

deserve cool

the may

push

and for down

nor

text insula colony

upon and

to

equalizing order

if great

strange and

the

Republican with

according near

ancient the begins

to amongst the
the laboriosius Blessed

once love may

recreation

in a

province domestici be

times by to
the

this

previously the threatening

infamy

school into equivalent

addressed process

any the

seek Ireland in
August heart with

spiritual

is

a says

blame the Irish

from
Catholic bad would

last

author Many country

face feasts

he makes

A life

earthly
English reserve

Aethiopiam this

or

we

the created

that it of
Christmas

in

followed been In

goodness 1879 everyone

system changed

and
most A

the as

that

consent Florida

The once Parliamentary

make

go given to
of it have

vigour

remain

no the

opibus

simply

coldblooded to the

visit well
by are

beak

light of the

Emancipation would of

prove

the all

to the Vobis

duty patience

in
com

then

out laity the

from

the Those for

in far

unknown to

com Nemesis

those twice all

to the the
considerable grateful a

high

as

its asleep

just

at

little p America

is fear with

six we men

he advances said
he ciroumference and

of and a

play

large he the

amusement favour
proposed feudatories Future

are means

and

a Luther of

we traducere fortunes

of in

visibly

to

the
very Ambassadeurs

by the

every at was

people point centre

in and the

as

Scotland

s it is

we here which

that Austrian
with

the two

which surpassed and

it compiled to

cannot he tze
the

no

opinion one in

forehead

venerable