Marginalized Minority Discrimination
How systematic racial dynamics, colorism, and misogyny impact minorities
Despite varying cultural contexts, marginalized minority groups across the globe face parallel forms of discrimination rooted in systemic racial dynamics, colorism, and misogyny. These forms of oppression are configured differently based on region, but share a common feature in how they exclude, dehumanize, and prevent opportunities for those affected by it. They continue to eternalize racial hierarchies, preserving power and privilege for certain individuals while marginalized communities are stuck in cycles of exclusion and violence. The persistence of these struggles reinforce social inequality, hindering progress toward global equity.
ON THIS PAGE YOU’LL DISCOVER:
– Colorism as a Cross-Cultural Issue
– Misogyny and the Double Oppression of Minority Women
Global Racial Dynamics
Racial hierarchies take different forms depending on where you are in the world, but their roots are often the same, which is colonialism and the ideologies that came with it. Across regions/ continents, these hierarchies were built to justify the discrimination, exploitation, and exclusion of marginalized racial and ethnic groups. The formation of ideals or ideologies like ethnocentrism, white superiority, the “White Man’s Burden”, Christian paternalism, and pseudoscientific racism were used to frame certain groups as inferior and in need of control. These beliefs didn’t disappear after colonialism ended; instead they were embedded into systems that govern society today. What began as colonial domination turned into legal, political, and cultural structures that continue to deny minority groups basic human rights.
Whether we’re looking at Black Americans in the United States, Dalits in India, Indigenous Australians, or Afro-Latinos across Latin America. These groups continue to face systemic barriers that restrict their access to education, employment, safety, policies, and political representation. These inequalities are the result of racial hierarchies that were designed to structurally, systemically and institutionalize the oppression of these minority groups. Moreover, this discrimination is reinforced by media representation of minority groups as stereotypical, which perpetuate these narratives in ways that criminalize or devalue marginalized communities.
For instance the culture or popularity of bad news coverage of these groups creates one-dimensional images/perspectives that shape public perception which forms the narrative that these structural inequalities are natural and deserved. That creates an image of these populations as being a representation of a category like Black Americans being linked to crime, Dalits to poverty, or Indigenous to the past. The framework of these communities encourages government officials, institutions and some members of society to support and ignore the treatment of these minorities in different regions of the world (society).
The United States and Slavery: Black/ African American
In the United States of America, racial oppression emerged when European settlers established systems of slavery to fuel their empire’s/ colonies’ economic growth and consolidate social control during the early 1600s. As a result many African people were forcibly brought to the colonies and placed into lifelong bondage. This was initially justified by religious and economic reasoning; but by the early 1700s, laws such as the Virginia Slave Codes of 1705 shifted these justifications to one based entirely on race. These laws categorized Africans and their descendants as property, denied them legal rights and prohibited interracial marriage or cooperation. This led to Blackness becoming permanently tied to social inferiority and servitude, while whiteness was legally and culturally positioned as the norm of power, intelligence, and morality. This shows that colonialism did not just influence the treatment of Black people in America; instead it created a framework that would evolve into a national system of racial dominance.
For instance, the wealth of early American colonies particularly those in the South, where cotton, sugar, and tobacco industries were flourishing. The immense wealth of these industries depended on the enslavement of Africans and the spread of the belief that Black people were less than human. This ideology was not only accepted and used as a justification for slavery instead, it was reinforced through the law, religion, and education of that century/period. Even after the formal abolition of slavery in 1865 through the 13th Amendment, the racial hierarchy it created remained firmly intact. Moreover, following the civil war (1861-1865), a short period of reconstruction (1865-1877) gave newly freed Black Americans a glimpse of political participation and legal rights. However, white backlash quickly dismantled this progress through the establishment of the Black Codes, which criminalized basic aspects of Black life, such as unemployment, loitering or failure to carry proof of work and everyday behaviors. These laws allowed the local government to re-enslave Black people through convict leasing resulting in the mass arrest and forced labor of thousands of Black men, essentially reintroducing slavery under a new name.
Then, after federal troops withdrew in 1877, the Southern states established Jim Crow laws, a set of segregationist policies that lasted into the 1960s backed by the Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) of the Supreme Court ruling, which legalized separate but equal (segregation), that denied Black Americans access to quality schools, public facilities and legal protections. This racial oppression was then further institutionalized through federal policies in the 20th century such as the federal housing administration (FHA). The FHA was established in 1934 which created lending guidelines that redlined Black neighborhoods making them unfit for investments. This practice was backed by the Home Owners’ Loan Corporation (HOLC) whose color-coded maps labeled Black areas in red, cutting off residents from home loans and insurance. This locked generations of Black families out of wealth building opportunities through homeownership. Meanwhile, racially restrictive covenants like legal agreements between white homeowners not to sell Black buyers were widely used until they were declared unenforceable in Shelly v. Kraemer (1948).
Then, in education, the landmark case Brown v. The Board of Education of 1954 ruled that segregated schools were unconstitutional; but many districts resisted integration. For example, in the Prince Edward Country, Virginia, white officials shut down public schools entirely from 1959 to 1964 instead of allowing Black students to attend. Even when schools were legally desegregated, racial divisions remained due to school zoning laws, unequal funding for black schools and white flight. Furthermore, the criminal justice system became another mechanism of control which is evident through the War on Drugs launched in 1971 under President Nixon and was expanded by President Reagan in the 1980s. The War on Drugs disproportionately targeted Black communities and resulted in the mass imprisonment of many black Americans. For instance, the anti drug abuse act of 1986 imposed harsher penalties for crack cocaine, which was more common in Black neighborhoods than for powder cocaine, which was used more often by white Americans despite their chemical similarity. The number of incarcerated Black Americans increased externally due to that act and also because of the mandatory minimum sentencing laws or the three-strikes laws resulted in the data or reality of one in three Black men being expected to serve time in prison, despite similar crime rates across other racial groups in the 2000s. These laws effectively imprisoned Black Americans through prison labor.
Nevertheless, resistance to these systems of oppression have remained constant throughout American history. From the early abolitionist movements to the Civil Rights era, Black Americans have consistently fought for equality and justice. The passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which outlawed segregation and employment discrimination, and the Voting Rights Act of 1965, which banned racially discriminatory voting practices highlights the significant legal changes/ battles against these systems of oppression. This is prevalent as these victories challenged the legal foundation of Jim Crow, yet they did not dismantle the deeper structures of racial inequality embedded in American institutions.
Even as laws changed, the systems built to uphold white dominance adapted as evident in 2013, the Supreme Court’s decision in Shelby County v. Holder significantly weakened the Voting Rights Act by removing federal oversight of states with histories of racial discrimination. This ruling opened the door for a resurgence of voter suppression laws, such as strict ISD requirements and polling site closures, that disproportionately affected Black and minority voters. These setbacks show how structural racism had persisted over policies into the political system’s resistance to accountability. At the same time, media representation has played a pivotal role in the reinforcement of racial hierarchies in America. Since the 1960s, Black Americans have been consistently overrepresented in news coverage of crime, especially in local television broadcasts. These portrayals often show Black suspects without the same anonymity or context given to white suspects which feeds the public perception of Blackness being linked to danger and criminality. This distorted narrative has been essential to the shaping of public opinions which influences the ruling from the jury to policing tactics of politicians as a result of this perceived legitimacy of anti-Black policies.
Despite these obstacles, resistance grows from generation to generation starting from movements like Black Lives Matters, which started from the killing of Trayvon Martin in 2012. That movement was further amplified by the death of Michael Brown, George Floyd, and Breonna Taylor all of which have helped many to come together to demonstrate the importance of racial justice and equality. That helps them to confront the individual acts of racism and the system of racial inequality that has been oppressing them for centuries. Yet progress remains uneven because structural inequality still continues to define the lives of many Black Americans with voter suppression, economic marginalization, and targeted policing still being widespread.
Colorism as a Cross-Cultural Issue
How European Colonialism Created Colorism Beauty Standards
The effects of colonization in a post-colonialism world have had staggering effects on the perception and standards of beauty that are based on how light skin shades could possibly be. In the mid to late 19th century, countries colonized by Spaniards like the Philippines resulted in mixed-raced children or ‘Mestizos / Mestizas’ (People with European ancestry) between Spanish citizens stationed in the country and locals. These people of mixed race were treated significantly better than full Filipinos because their lighter skin color and Eurocentric features was perceived to be of a higher stature like the country’s colonizers, unlike the natives who were often darker and had features inclined to the warmer atmosphere and local factors (i.e. flatter noses, darker skin tone, shorter average height). People who had a lighter skin color were considered to be a ‘step-up’ and were provided more privilege in a society that valued the contrast in a cultural hierarchy.
The Lack of Representation and Opportunities in Modern Culture
Recently, major beauty brands such as YSL, NARS, and Tarte have all come under extreme scrutiny because of their lack of inclusivity in their created shades for (usually darker) skin tones. This is just a reflection of how parts of the world still refuse to accept or accommodate all skin tones and continuously affects and loses the trust of customers from different racial groups everywhere. Observed in these business choices are the underlying views of colorism, in only accommodating lighter shades and erasing from their minds the existence and importance of recognizing darker skin tones within all generations. This lack of representation also correlates to a lack of opportunities, especially in the professional field. Many companies have hiring practices rooted in colorism, with assumptions that people with a lighter skin tone tend to have achieved more in education and society, therefore being favored for job positions because of this assumed ‘experience’. This bias can happen unconsciously or not, only it still speaks of the growing problem based on the colors or shades of our skin.
Impact on Southeast and South Asian Countries
Countries whose citizens have always naturally had darker skin tones have often been subject to internalized hatred, colorism, and insecurity because of the standards that perpetuate that lighter skin is better. Whitening products have been popular in South and Southeast Asian countries because they feed the low self-esteem from the long thought idea that whiter skin is ‘better’. People often treat Filipinos, Indians, or Thai people that are ‘half-white’ (American, Scottish, Australian, British, etc.) because it has been so long ingrained in the minds of natives to these countries that looking different from their natural features is way better and more socially uplifted. Women from these cultures are especially prone to these unreachable standards, and told that to be beautiful is to be ‘white’, that they have to be the farthest they can possibly be from the native looks and ancestral features in order to be liked by others. It is never just about ‘skin color’, it is always going to be about how differently each person is treated just because they have been born a shade lighter.
Effects of Colorism Present in Media on Child Development
It has been noticeable that in the past two decades, pageantry candidates from countries that naturally have darker skin tones, have been Wasians or people with mixed blood (usually European). This has greatly affected each child that sees them, because each time they are paraded on national television, a cycle is perpetuated that you can only be beautiful if you look or are ‘white’. The same goes for TV personalities and actors in the films and series we love. Actors / actresses from countries like Brazil, India, Thailand, and the Philippines have always been a shade lighter than the average person watching the actual show. Because this ‘standard’ of beauty has been so long perpetuated and constantly exposed to the minds of young local children, only insecurity and many thoughts of changing how they look sprout in their minds. Children as young as seven have been exposed to skin-lightening creams and ‘papaya soap’ in order to make them whiter, and therefore ‘prettier’. It has always been harmful to whitewash the figures that we see everyday and that can so heavily influence us each time we and especially children see them on screen, because it only shows that they are ‘beautiful’ because they are unlike us. Their beauty stems from the skin shade and only a lack of self-acceptance stems within us.
What Is Colorism and Where It Comes From
Colorism is when people with lighter skin are treated better than those with darker skin, even within the same racial or ethnic group. This idea comes from a long history of racism and colonialism, where lighter skin was seen as better or more “civilized.” These old beliefs still affect how people see beauty today.
How Capitalism Makes Money from Colorism
Businesses use colorism to sell beauty products, especially skin-lightening creams. They make people feel like they need lighter skin to be beautiful, successful, or accepted. The skin-whitening industry makes billions of dollars worldwide by selling this message. People buy these products hoping to fit in or get ahead, which keeps the cycle going.
Media and Beauty Standards
TV, movies, ads, and social media often show lighter-skinned people as the standard of beauty. These images influence how people think they should look. Companies pick models and celebrities with lighter skin more often, which makes others feel like they don’t measure up. This pushes people to spend money on products to change how they look.
The Big Picture
Colorism, capitalism, and beauty standards all work together. Colorism creates unfair ideas about beauty, capitalism sells products to profit from those ideas, and media spreads those beauty standards to more people. It’s a system that keeps people chasing a certain look while big companies make money from their insecurities.
Misogyny and the Double Oppression of Minority Women
Women of color in the United States face compounded discrimination arising from the intersection of race and gender. This intersectionality manifests in various systemic injustices, including violence, health disparities, professional barriers, and pervasive stereotypes that silence and marginalize their voices. Indigenous women and girls are disproportionately affected by violence and homicide. In Canada, they are at least three times more likely to experience violence and six times more likely to be murdered than non-Indigenous women. This crisis is exacerbated by systemic racism, underreporting, and inadequate responses from law enforcement and the media. The “No More Stolen Sisters” campaign by Amnesty International highlights these issues and calls for action to address the discrimination leading to MMIW cases. Women of color, particularly Black and Indigenous women, face significant disparities in reproductive health care. Black women are 3.3 times more likely, and American Indian or Alaska Native women are 2.5 times more likely, to die from pregnancy-related causes compared to white women. These disparities stem from systemic racism, socioeconomic factors, and limited access to quality health care. Organizations like In Our Own Voice advocate for reproductive justice, emphasizing the need for policies that address these inequities. Black women encounter unique challenges in professional settings, including discrimination, lack of mentorship, and underrepresentation in leadership roles. Studies show that nearly 57% of Black women have experienced racism or discrimination at work. The “glass cliff” phenomenon further illustrates how Black women are often placed in leadership positions during times of crisis, setting them up for increased scrutiny and potential failure.
Meanwhile, stereotypes like the “angry Black woman” and the “submissive Asian woman” contribute to the cultural silencing of women of color. The “angry Black woman” trope portrays Black women as hostile and aggressive, discouraging them from expressing themselves openly for fear of being labeled negatively. The “angry Black woman” stereotype is a pervasive trope in media and popular culture, portraying Black women as irrationally angry. This characterization not only distorts the diverse experiences of Black women but also contributes to real-world discrimination and marginalization. Below are some notable examples from television, film, and real-life situations that illustrate how this stereotype has been perpetuated:
1. Sapphire in Amos ‘n’ Andy
Originating in the 1950s radio and television show Amos ‘n’ Andy, the character Sapphire is one of the earliest embodiments of the “angry Black woman” stereotype. She is depicted as a loud, nagging, and emasculating wife, setting a template for similar portrayals in later media.
2. Aunt Esther in Sanford and Son
Aunt Esther, a recurring character in the 1970s sitcom Sanford and Son, is portrayed as confrontational and quick-tempered, often engaging in verbal sparring matches with the protagonist, Fred Sanford. Her character reinforces the trope of the combative Black woman.
3. Wilhelmina Slater in Ugly Betty
In the television series Ugly Betty, Wilhelmina Slater is depicted as an ambitious and assertive fashion editor. While her character is multifaceted, aspects of her portrayal tap into the stereotype by emphasizing her as domineering and unapproachable.
4. Angela in Why Did I Get Married?
In Tyler Perry’s film Why Did I Get Married?, the character Angela is portrayed as loud, aggressive, and confrontational, particularly towards her husband. This depiction aligns with the “Sapphire” caricature, presenting Black women as perpetually angry.
5. Serena Williams
Tennis champion Serena Williams has faced media scrutiny that aligns with the “angry Black woman” stereotype. Notably, during the 2018 US Open, her on-court dispute with an umpire was widely criticized, with some commentators labeling her as hysterical or unprofessional, despite similar behavior being overlooked in male athletes.
These examples demonstrate how the “angry Black woman” stereotype has been embedded in various forms of media, influencing public perception and contributing to the marginalization of Black women. Recognizing and challenging these portrayals is essential in fostering a more accurate and respectful representation of Black women’s experiences.
Similarly, the stereotype of the “submissive Asian woman” depicts Asian women as docile and compliant, which can lead to their voices being overlooked in professional and social contexts. Asian women—often portrayed as hypersexualized and eager to please—have been a persistent trope in Western media for over a century. This portrayal has contributed to harmful perceptions and real-world discrimination against Asian women.
Furthermore, this trope is prevalent in the pairing of white men and Asian women in the media to tell a story of submission, and getting out of her comfort zone through the means of a white man. This stereotype unfortunately dates back to 1875 America, in which the 1875 Act prevented Asian women from immigrating to America for “prostitution work,” essentially reducing them to something to be feared, and steering them cleverly to avoid tempting men. This led to significant pushback for women who sought economic progress in America. Their submissiveness and “stereotypicalness” of being sexually promiscuous towards white men reduces them as being reduced to being objects of desire.
Here are some notable examples from film, television, and broader media that illustrate how this stereotype has been perpetuated:
1. Madame Butterfly (1904 opera, various film adaptations)
This opera tells the story of Cio-Cio San, a Japanese woman who falls in love with an American naval officer. She is portrayed as the ultimate “Lotus Blossom”—innocent, submissive, and tragically devoted to a man who ultimately abandons her. This narrative has been criticized for reinforcing the idea of Asian women as self-sacrificing and dependent on Western men.
2. The World of Suzie Wong (1960)
Nancy Kwan stars as Suzie Wong, a Hong Kong sex worker who falls for a white American man. Her character embodies the submissive and hypersexualized Asian woman, reinforcing the “China doll” stereotype. Suzie’s portrayal as eager to please and reliant on a Western savior has been a focal point in discussions about racial and gender stereotypes in the media.
3. Miss Saigon (1989 musical)
An adaptation of Madame Butterfly, this musical features Kim, a Vietnamese woman who falls in love with an American soldier. Kim is depicted as willing to do anything for her lover. Critics have pointed out that the musical perpetuates Orientalist fantasies and reduces Asian women to tragic, one-dimensional figures.
4. The Office – “A Benihana Christmas” (Season 3, Episode 10)
In this episode, Michael Scott brings two Asian waitresses to the office party, referring to the restaurant as “Asian Hooters.” He marks one of the women’s arms to tell them apart, reducing them to interchangeable objects. Actress Kat Ahn, who played one of the waitresses, later spoke out about how the role perpetuated stereotypes of Asian women as submissive and objectified.
5. Full Metal Jacket (1987)
A Vietnamese sex worker approaches American soldiers with the line, “Me so horny. I have loved you for a long time.” This phrase became a pop culture reference, often used to mock and fetishize Asian women. The scene has been criticized for dehumanizing Asian women and reinforcing the stereotype of them as sexually available and subservient.
The perpetuation of these stereotypes has had tangible effects on the lives of Asian women. For instance, the tragic 2021 Atlanta spa shootings, where six of the eight victims were Asian women, highlighted how hypersexualized and submissive stereotypes can contribute to real-world violence. The shooter claimed to be eliminating “temptations,” reflecting how these harmful narratives can influence perceptions and actions. These examples underscore the importance of critically examining media representations and advocating for more nuanced and respectful portrayals of Asian women. Challenging these stereotypes is essential in combating racism, sexism, and the fetishization that many Asian women continue to face.
Addressing these layered forms of discrimination requires a multifaceted approach that includes policy reform, increased representation, and challenging harmful stereotypes. With the rise of conservatism and normalization in the political spectrum in the mistreatment of people of color, it’s very crucial to have heightened awareness and educate ourselves on our country’s injustices. By amplifying the voices of women of color and acknowledging the unique challenges they face, society can move toward greater equity and inclusion.
The interconnected struggles of marginalized racial groups — compounded by colorism and misogyny — reveal a global pattern of oppression that demands collective awareness and action. These harmful narratives can be dismantled by challenging the stereotypes and biases that silence the voices of marginalized minority groups. If these voices are heard, they can define their own story and reframe how people view race, gender, and identity. By acknowledging these overlapping injustices, All The Same aims to foster empathy, challenge harmful systems, and advocate for equity through education and solidarity.
Introduction written by Anika Luangaphay
Global Racial Dynamics written by Mercy Aremu
Colorism as a Cross-Cultural Issue written by Jana Merin and Makayla Anderson
Misogyny and the Double Oppression of Minority Women written by Jelany Plasencia and Riya Sharma
Conclusion written by Vivian Ho