I take serious offence to this article. I am a writer of coloured origin but whoever wrote this article doesn’t understand the basic structure of writing. When writers use adjectives to describe a person, they do so to ignite the imagination, not insult someone racially. I love the description chocolate coloured because it says so much more than saying (s)he was brown skinned. I have read multiple books that use adjectives to describe white people (ps - coloured people in the west, try reading books by authors not just from Europe or America and you’ll know better). They are compared to milk, cream, vanilla. Calling someone spaghetti, if used correctly can be a great adjective but that didn’t seem to be the purpose of this article. The sole purpose of this article, it seems, is to create controversy and bring negative descriptions of race where they aren’t really inherent. It’s a book, the writer has to use adjectives to describe the characters. And yes if you read western books the white skin tone is default assumption because the white skin tone is default in those countries/cultures. Read books from African authors and you will find the default skin tone to be a hell lot darker. Gain knowledge before you criticize something otherwise you just seem foolish, like a little child trying to throw a tantrum for not getting a toy not realizing that the parent can barely afford the food to feed them.