In cases of widely misinterpreted texts like this, wherein the predominant narrative about it bears little resemblance to the actual language of the text, the best course of action is to state facts.
"African skin is dark because Ham was cursed for seeing Noah naked, and this curse lasts to this day."
(Related to this belief is the added notion that Ham's other two siblings, Shem and Japheth, represent all Asian lineage, and European lineage, respectively).
In fact, Genesis 9 says nothing of the skin color of Ham, Canaan, nor Noah for that matter. The details of the story in the ninth chapter of Genesis have nothing immediately to do with race or ethnicity; that association was added on by Europeans looking to justify their enslavement of persons from Africa. To make this point perfectly clear, it is important to remember that Ham, Shem and Jepheth (the main characters in Genesis 9), are all sons of Noah. They certainly came from the same race, and therefore no blessing or curse placed on one and not the other could justifiably extend to one of their races and not the others'.
"The Curse of Ham explains the constant subjugation of the African people and justifies why slavery took/takes place"*
*Please note, these are paraphrases of damaging beliefs about this Scriptural passage; these do not in any way reflect the convictions of the host of this webpage.
Noah cursed Canaan only- not Ham, nor his descendants. According to Jewish tradition, only God would have the power to curse or bless generations, and God is alarmingly absent from this part of the story! In fact, a few verses before this text a blessing was extended to Ham, Shem and Japheth. It would be more logical (and unharmful!) to understand that blessing to extend to Ham’s future generations, rather than an abrupt curse uttered by a drunken Noah.