| Mr Khan said: I don't doubt US slaveholders used similar practices, though in their case the divide was usually "house slaves" and "field slaves" (as well as one of the debated origins of the word "cracker", as well, as our own Badgenome pointed out, being a derogatory term for the Scotch-Irish like the word hillbilly), though to what degree that leads to the modern prejudice, i cannot say. |
It's pretty complex. To the extent that it happened, it was because lighter skinned slaves were usually the mistresses and children of the owner, so their better position was more a function of nepotism than colorism. Having lighter skin could actually be more of a liability than a boon since it had the potential to incite all kinds of uncomfortable feelings about miscegenation. The reason why the stereotypical large, dark-skinned mammy type was favored for cooking and taking care of kids is because she wasn't viewed as a sexual threat by the woman of the house, while light skinned slaves who were living proof of a husband's infidelity could just as likely expect to get it doubly bad and be sent to the fields to learn their place as to get any kind of preferential treatment.
But, of course, since it's widely believed to be the case, it contributes to modern day colorism regardless.
