Comment by ajju | Hacker News Reader

Comment by ajju | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

1) It is pure aesthetics, but the bias against darker skin, while not based on race, is deep rooted and does result in people with darker skin being discriminated against. It is not to the degree of dark skinned people not being allowed in X places, but it is bad enough that a groom would very often choose a fairer bride to a darker one.

2) It is very wide spread.

3) Not really. It has been around for thousands of years and has very little to do with recently developed fascination for or admiration for Europeans. Conceivably it could have it's roots in the "Aryan invasion" theory or a another time thousands of years ago when the ruling class had fair skin, but you will see references to "fair princesses" in mythological Hindu texts thousands of years ago. It is important to note though that there are references to "dark skinned beautiful women" also in some of these texts. So the bias could have been regional inside India. I don't know of anyone who has studied this extensively.

Thank you for your response.

One more question, is there a movement in India to counter this trend? kind of like the civil-rights movement in the US 50 years ago?

Also, a related question, how prevalent is the caste system? are people discriminated against based on their caste? I hear it's not a significant factor anymore, but what's your experience been?

1) I hate to say it but often lower castes have dark skin and african features. You will also find most of the brightest students in a University are brahmins - the highest caste - just ask your friends their caste and correlate with their intelligence. The caste system is racist. You cannot change your caste. Period. You were born with it. It is interesting but sad. Forced hereditary occupations lead to differences in appearance and even IQ across thousands of years. Low castes clean toilets - high castes are priests in temples (translation: the intellectual leaders today).

2) The caste system is very prevalent. It also leads to corruption similarly as Rick Warren found tribalism was the cause of corruption in Africa.

3) How many white-black mixed marriages do you see in America? Not many. Most kids up for adoption are biracial black-white. The prejudices remain over here in the USA - at least in relationships. Read the chapter on preferences in interracial dating in the book Freakonomics.

This is because the higher castes are wealthier! Wow.

With what I know about the Indian education system, it is impossible to make it into the best schools without a great deal of personal wealth.

"it is impossible to make it into the best schools without a great deal of personal wealth"

you are mistaken. The best Universities are almost free - subsidized by the government. (However in high schools, those that are English speaking Western schools do require wealth). Only brains counts. The IIT Math entrance exam is said to be the toughest in the world (google for past qs papers).

Yes, but you can't get into the universities without a good education before that. I work with many people from India from all age ranges, from 22 to their 50s who are all MDs or PhDs, and they all tell me that before a child is even born they have to begin bribing school officials to get them into one of the better schools. This continues every time the child/student goes to a different school until the university level. Without going to a good primary and secondary school, there is no chance of getting into a good university. Even at the university level there is a lot of bribing that takes place.

When you have a society where bribing is the norm (nothing is possible without a bribe basically, and even then its not guaranteed), the people with wealth are obviously going to be the ones to benefit most and stay on top. No matter how intelligent, if you don't have the money for the bribes, you can't get anywhere.

the people you met were simply making excuses and misleading you. (there is always scope for corruption in school admissions everywhere).

It is like saying, if you studied in public school in small town america, you cannot get into Harvard.

But it's pretty much impossible. I went to a very good public school in a wealthy suburb and the valedictorian didn't get into Duke, let alone Harvard/Yale/Princeton/MIT/Stanford.

I agree with this. I went to a private school because my family could afford it, and as valedictorian I got into every school I applied to and received full scholarships to most. The valedictorian of the public school didn't get any scholarships, not even to the local community college. Anyone who could afford to send their kids to private school did.

It's just a fact that people with more wealth have better socioeconomic opportunity than people with less wealth, not that they're more intelligent. This means better schools and better education.

Yes except the only metric that Universities in India can use to give you admission is your score on a centralized public examination. No essays, no discretion what soever. They have to publish a huge list of everyone's scores and the top n people get in.

Further, there is actually reservation for poor people from lower castes (25 - 50% of the seats). So it's not the same thing. I don't disagree with ingenium that better socio-economic opportunities help richer people do better, but the discrimination against lower caste people is not systemic in higher education.

Why would they make excuses and mislead me in a way that makes their country look bad? We were simply talking one day comparing the educational systems of India and the United States, and they said they favored the system here and thought it worked much better, despite receiving degrees from prestigious Indian universities such as AIIMS.

Your small town analogy doesn't work. A better analogy is if you went to a poor inner city public school, then you can't get into Harvard. This is basically true, since you don't receive a good enough education to get the scores to get in. Also, if your family is poor, especially in India, you have to work to support your family and self rather than focus on your school work, which leads to lower grades and test scores.

Quite to the contrary, you will find that Gujarat, perhaps the richest state in the country, is least represented in the IITs and the IIMs (including IIM Ahmedabad which is ironically in Gujarat).

Yes K to 12 level education needs money but University admissions do not depend at all on what school you attended, only on your score in the Std 12 exam held by the state or an entrance exam. Further there are 25 - 50% reservations for poor people from lower castes in most Universities. So yes bribing is a big problem and so is casteism but one place where the problem is close to non existent is higher education.

The thing about wealth is patently untrue. 25 - 50% of the seats in ALL schools (yes, even private colleges, at least in the state I am from) are reserved for poor people from lower castes and their ANNUAL fees are less USD 200. I know first hand that this is true in Maharashtra (the state that Bombay belongs to).

This is interesting. What stops people from just lying about their caste? or is it something that's actually recorded right on their birth certificate?

Also, I wonder what it is that makes black-white marriages taboo, while asian-white marriages are almost becoming the norm in some places.

many Asian/Indian men find white women more attractive - that is why models in these countries tend to look caucasian. It works the other way, too. My wife said that she observed in Africa, that white women only married Africans if they were highly educated, handsome and wealthy.

"what it is that makes black-white marriages taboo"

Black Americans are a lower caste - Unfortunately. How many wealthy intellectual white-black marriages do you see? Few. But now Hispanics are the new ------ in America today. (a certain word that I wont use)

------- I personally find it offensive that you even put that line in there, juwo.

Sorry, but that is the truth IMHO. Anti-Hispanic feelings run high in many states in the US and is largely unreported in the media. Just as anti-black feeling was socially acceptable in an earlier era.

(I look Hispanic myself, and realized how much they are disliked when my wife observed that I receive glares and cold stares from strangers).

Well their last name is what would prevent them from lying. They can change the last name though.

The irony is that there has been reservation for people from lower castes in government jobs and schools across the country and they pay much lower fees and get in with fewer marks. So you now have people from higher castes changing their names to lower castes to cheat and get into schools easily and also pay less.

I think you've been modded down as noting the differences between races is seen to be discriminating against them in the US.

There could be a number of factors that determine the difference between university entrance scores for different racial groups. While those places are free, lower caste groups may be too worried about feeding themselves, or trying to protect themselves in rough environments, to worry about studying. They could also be, in general, less genetically gifted.

Though unpopular, it is no more racist to state the second options than it is to analyse the difference between African and European performance in athletic sports. People once though that a more athletic society was responsible for the generally better performance of Africans. these days most sports physiologists will acknowledge that African people have a genetically higher percentage of 'fast twitch' muscles.

Just because something is unpalatable does not mean it shouldn't be discussed.

"African people have a genetically higher percentage of 'fast twitch' muscles"

wow. did not know that.

No, he is modded down because he is making factually inaccurate statements (which are also racist). Where is the data backing up his claim that the most intelligent students in colleges across India come from the highest caste?

ask any student from India. (I was born and raised there). That is why there is affirmative action for the lower castes.

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=59891

Your comment that forced hereditary occupations lead to differences in IQ. I fail to see the selecting force that would drive a lower IQ. If there are generations of manual labor as an occupation, that would be a selection force in favor of being stronger and bigger, but would not select AGAINST intelligence.

Other than that, there are clear differences in race genetically. Caste, in the Indian sense, is much harder to argue and would have to say the differences are minimal since it is more recent on an evolutionary timescale. Exceptions are when there was forced selection, such as with the slave trade which lead to the descendants of slaves being larger and stronger than those still in Africa. If there is a physical difference in appearance, then there is a high probability of other genetic differences. A perfect example is the distribution of immunity to HIV. It's really only in Europe, specifically Northern and Eastern Europe. Different geographic areas have had different selecting forces over thousands of years, so the populations are different.

Regarding (1) - Have you ever been to South India my friend? So many of the Brahmins from South India I know, the Aiyyars and the Aiyyangars have dark skin. I was born a Brahmin myself and > 75% of my family members have "dark" skin.

The caste system is definitely racist and a much much bigger problem but this whole linking of skin color to castes is just not true.

see http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=62854

What the hell is "african features"? You say the caste system is racist and then yourself say the most intelligent people are from higher castes. Don't you think that is a racist claim?

By the way I know several people from lower castes who are super intelligent. And forced hereditary occupations are a thing of the past EVERYWHERE. Even in Bihar, our most backward state, you can't FORCE someone from the lower cast to stick to a profession (which is why Lalu Prasad Yadav, our railway minister and his party came to power, by fighting for Dalits, or at least claiming to).

Make no mistake, the caste system is very prevalent but you don't need to exaggerate to make your point.

It is my observation - I too studied in India. It is common knowledge that brahmins (caste) as a group are more intelligent than the average population. For example, They have made up the bulk of Nobel laureates from India.

My room mate was from the untouchable caste (translation for Americans). He was super intelligent too - managed to leave the country and got 2 post graduate degrees in the USA, trained himself to run marathons.

regarding your comment on hereditary occupations, please read this article

And no, I am not a brahmin.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/2231011.stm

"In the dead of the night, when the city of six million goes to sleep, groups of jobless low-caste Hindus, known as Dalits, eke out a living by removing human excrement from pits in the poorer neighbourhoods of the city."

Ajju,

the word 'caste' comes from the Sanskrit 'Varna' which means 'skin color'.

see http://www.raceandhistory.com/cgi-bin/forum/webbbs_config.pl...

Yes. Google Babasaheb Ambedkar. He led such a movement 50 years ago. This movement is now very politicized though and not very true to it's roots I am afraid.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com