Read on Twitter
Tosses in what I said about that imagining of blk features stereotyped as grotesque being informed by *ableism*.
That woman has a very symmetrical face, “healthy” jaw line ect. Her nose is flat (an Af feature) but it is not large (excess/monstrous=ableism) https://twitter.com/obaa_boni/status/1278148856103010306
That woman has a very symmetrical face, “healthy” jaw line ect. Her nose is flat (an Af feature) but it is not large (excess/monstrous=ableism) https://twitter.com/obaa_boni/status/1278148856103010306
Y’all are so close with the analysis. So close but the lack of wanting to admit that what informs what is stereotyped as “blackness” (the “ugliness@/less humanness aspect) is not about what is actually the most common Af feature 1/2
but invoking ableist understandings of the human or of the monster.
Deformity/Lack of symmetry. Excess.
Deformity/Lack of symmetry. Excess.
That woman is not read as feminine becuase she is necessarily read as having a face closer to proximity to whiteness itself. It is lack of proximity to the monstrous.
*now* our understandings of the monstrous is seemingly coded as just black post TAST but
*now* our understandings of the monstrous is seemingly coded as just black post TAST but
What informed this idea of Af/Black as monstrous is a reimagining of the black body (one of the few times the term is relevant lol) as one that is both physically and intellectually disabled.
I promise you the caricatures made of black people ie. sambo weren’t necessarily made because that’s what the average Af looked like. It is because when yt people reimagine a black person they pull from their readings of disabled bodies to paint the picture.
