In my first post I cited an example of a dark skinned society (Tanzania) putting a special, arguably higher, value on the lightest skinned members of that society (alibinos). Perhaps I should have added the area has one of the highest incidences of albinism in the world. One albino every 1429 births according to Wikipedia so unusual but not especially so.
My second post was unnecessarily confusing. I discovered - while searching for further data on albinos - a reference (cited in that post) which stated, I paraphrase here, that Japanese society, in general, considers a paler skin the ideal. To clarify that has nothing to do with albinism other than it was mentioned in an article about albinos.
So sorry again for the confusion. But I was trying to provide two instances of very different cultures putting a higher value on lighter skins.
If lighter and darker skin did trigger an instinctual response in humanity, it could have evolved purely as coincidence; for instance, it might be a survival trait to avoid plants or animals that share a shade with certain African races. Alternately, it could be simple sexual selection–if, say, early dominant male hominids hogged all the shade, and so were the only ones without a tan.
Of course, the evidence in this thread has pretty well convinced me that my speculation was misguided. Still, I feel better for having asked. As Edison (supposedly) said, “I have not failed. I’ve just found 10,000 ways that won’t work”
It might not be that simple. For instance, light skinned Europeans are also more likely to retain lactose tolerance into adulthood, offering them the cultural advantage of storing food energy in the form of cheese, very useful on expeditions of military conquest.
The advantage of lactose tolerance might merely be associated with pale skin, which, in itself, is actually a disadvantage, as it leaves the possessor more susceptible to sunburn and skin cancer.
Not all traits are directly advantageous or disadvantageous, but may be part of a “bundle” of traits which, overall, bring an advantage.
The case of sickle-cell disease is a famous example. The gene is advantageous in regions where malaria exposure is highly likely, but disadvantageous outside of those regions. The sickle-cell gene is associated with dark-skinned people, but isn’t meaningfully linked to it in any direct “cause and effect” having to do with overall survival. The sickle-cell gene could just as easily have been associated with some other reproductively isolated group of people, e.g. native central Americans.
The east african attitude revolves around a witchcraft belief and the murder of the albinos, it does not value them! They are seen as both a danger and a source of magic. this is the opposite of the idea of giving a higher status as humans.
I said Tanzanian Witches put a “special, arguably higher, value on albinos” which I stand by and have provided cites for. Indeed you state albinos are seen as a potential source of powerful magic. So it seems we agree they have special status and value derived from that status.
“Higher status as a human” is a trickier concept in this context.
On the one hand (no pun intended), that the society (or at least those in the society who believe in magic) want to dismember albinos for their body parts is not especially beneficial to the albinos. It treats them as a commodity source to be subjected to fear, pain, torture, mutilation and death.
However most societies have at some point practiced human sacrifice and history (including here myths and legends) records many example of kings and powerful figures sacrificing sons and daughters to appease Gods or invading warriors. Also, societies that sacrificed regularly often sought “high status” victims from an enemy’s population to sacrifice. The sacrifice specifically being chosen because the victim is highly valued therefore making it a more potent sacrifice. There are cites from the bible and Aztec mythology I can provide if required.
It remains a fact sacrificing someone (or a class of individual) can in a twisted way be affording them a higher status.